Useless SJW gives the finger to the wrong dude.

originally posted by: Lysergic
a reply to: InTheLight

Oh they are there for the taking.

Trust me.

You mean all Americans are there for the taking?

a reply to: InTheLight
I will discuss this no further with you. You need to get a life if this man bothers you. Go ahead and join #TeamTara but we will go ahead and talk about how crazy #TeamTara is!

originally posted by: Martin75
a reply to: InTheLight
I will discuss this no further with you. You need to get a life if this man bothers you. Go ahead and join #TeamTara but we will go ahead and talk about how crazy #TeamTara is!

I think they both have issues and so do many on this thread as well.

a reply to: InTheLight

I think you've gone blind from being "in the light".

The only people in this thread with issues are the ones defending the Tararist.

The rest of the contributors seem pretty level headed to me.

a reply to: InTheLight

No, just a treasure trove of lulz.

After watching the video here is my take on this;

Woman has to drive by a house to pick up her child at her child’s school. Said house has a Trump supporter who lives there and who has political signage in his yard, stating his political opinion and freedom of speech. She has passed by and gets offended by said signage. Sees owner of property there and flips him the bird. He gets in his vehicle and chases her down, cops get involved and tries to resolve/defuse the situation.

Both are in the wrong. The owner of the property did not have the right to chase her down, nor does he have the right to drive recklessly or act in a threatening manner. That much is true, and it could be considered to be a threat. The woman did not have to pause and flip him off instigating this entire event, nor even acknowledge him.

The freedom of speech is a touchy topic an she fails to see that as much as her flipping the man the bird is free speech, he has equal right to post a sign out that states Hillary for prison. And if she does not like such, or find such offensive, then perhaps she either needs to review the true meaning of freedom of speech and why such is present or perhaps look into other areas to live in.

The truest test of this freedom is not to protect speech that we agree with, but that which we do not agree with at all, even if it is tasteless and vulgar.

And the officer was the true hero in this case having to deal with 2 hot headed political persons.

She is lucky, cause both of their actions in some states, like Texas, could be considered an act of road rage.

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
After watching the video here is my take on this;

Are you basing this on the video footage of her roadside rant that she edited to remove things that the policeman was saying?

Or the CCTV footage that hasn't been released yet, but allegedly shows an extended campaign of verbal and physical violence against multiple family members living at that house?

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Read the thread. You are missing a lot of information.

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: SprocketUK
a reply to: InTheLight

How many Democrats just drive past yards with Trump signs in and respect the other person's right to show support for a different candidate?

How many Republicans do the same?

Excusing this woman's behaviour is a big part of the problem.

It needs to be called out for the idiotic act of uncivilised intolerance that it is. Any attempt to downplay what she (and other political and social retards) have done is simply foolish. Every one of them needs to be pilloried until they change their ways and act civilised like normal people.

What about the other political supporters that show their anger through violence at rallies. Isn't this a more important issue than droning on and on about one single anti-Trumper giving someone the finger?

Perhaps you failed to get my point?

No matter what side someone takes, if they behave in this way, they need eduacting.
There can't be any room for such intolerance in a modern, Western democracy.

Tara and her trolls need to be whipped through the streets, as does anyone unable to behave in a civilised manner towards a Hillary supporter who expresses their reasonable support.

originally posted by: Bobaganoosh
a reply to: InTheLight

I think you've gone blind from being "in the light".

The only people in this thread with issues are the ones defending the Tararist.

The rest of the contributors seem pretty level headed to me.

My issue is that you label her SJW, that is false, as is all the other labels given her by other posters. She is just another person way too involved emotionally in your political s**tstorm there and is lashing out as are many people on both sides. But, this is par the course here, and I wish, in this case, I was not "in the light".

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Very level headed reply, and a rare one here.

a reply to: InTheLight

A very uniformed knee jerk opinion. Read the thread and be aware of his successful court ordered Restraining Order on her too.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: InTheLight

very uniformed knee jerk opinion. Read the thread and be aware of his court ordered Restraining Order on her too.

I don't know much about restraining orders, but I believe he received a preliminary order, and a court date set to determine whether or not the restraining order will become permanent. As I stated previously, the true facts will be told in court, because the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

a reply to: InTheLight

Wait until you see the video.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: InTheLight

Wait until you see the video.

What video?

a reply to: InTheLight
His CCTV footage compilation.

originally posted by: InTheLight

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: InTheLight

because the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

Or not. As you said, wait for the court date.

edit on 3-10-2016 by thepixelpusher because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: JohnPrewett

Please tell me I'm misreading this.

Are you equating having political yard signs to driving by someone's house with racially-charged signage directed toward them personally?

TheRedneck

Does or does not anyone have the "right" [in America] to respond to insult with violence ?

originally posted by: Martin75
a reply to: JohnPrewett
Have you followed this story at all???? I think you need to start at Page 1 and start reading...then get back to us. SMH

Does or does not anyone have the "right" [in America] to respond to insult with violence ?

originally posted by: JohnPrewett

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: JohnPrewett

Please tell me I'm misreading this.

Are you equating having political yard signs to driving by someone's house with racially-charged signage directed toward them personally?

TheRedneck

Does or does not anyone have the "right" [in America] to respond to insult with violence ?

You don't have the right to, but anyone could. Not sure where that is coming from though...haven't seen any violence in this case thus far.