piss drunk, armed, and collapsed in north texas

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:12 pm

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/08/justice/texas-randy-travis-arrest/index.html?hpt=hp_c3

lovely. second amendment and texas ki jai ho.

by Maria S Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:30 pm

Oh, I felt quite sad when I heard about Randy's break down..obviously he has serious problems with alcohol and much more going on..not unlike many other talented artists.

I like deep baritone voice..enjoy listening to his songs. Although, it's not going to be easy. hope he overcomes this difficult period, his addiction..and can recover from it.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:36 pm

maria, i don't care if he corrodes his liver, shrivels up and dies. just please take away his gun though.

by Maria S Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:43 pm

Sure, take away his gun..but, why this kola veri, kola veri Max? Ithu koncham overilla?

The poor man is obviously going through public humiliation and plenty of legal problems, hope he gets well.

by MaxEntropy_Man Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:47 pm

Maria S wrote:Sure, take away his gun..but, why this kola veri, kola veri Max? Ithu koncham overilla?

the only thing that struck me about that article was his threatening to shoot cops. and i had just read this article prior to posting that.

by Hellsangel Wed Aug 08, 2012 9:49 pm

Are you celebrating your full professorship, Il Professore?

by truthbetold Wed Aug 08, 2012 10:01 pm

Randy travis. Terrific voice. This incident reminds me of james brown ( i feel good so good ) run with cops.

by Idéfix Thu Aug 09, 2012 12:33 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/08/justice/texas-randy-travis-arrest/index.html?hpt=hp_c3

lovely. second amendment and texas ki jai ho.

So everybody is talking about this guy. WTF is Randy Travis? What is his claim to fame?

by Idéfix Thu Aug 09, 2012 12:38 am

Hellsangel wrote:Are you celebrating your full professorship, Il Professore?

How does anything that may or may not be happening in Max's real life have anything to do with this topic? Or are you expecting to convert him on the matter of his own real life?

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Aug 09, 2012 12:42 am

panini press wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/08/justice/texas-randy-travis-arrest/index.html?hpt=hp_c3

lovely. second amendment and texas ki jai ho.
So everybody is talking about this guy. WTF is Randy Travis? What is his claim to fame?

no idea. seems to be some kind of country music type person. i just found the news item on cnn and was struck by the comments that followed the article. every one of them making reference to his drinking problems, but no mention of his threatening to shoot those poor cops. it's at best a footnote to this incident. that's how inured the public has become to gun violence.

by Idéfix Thu Aug 09, 2012 1:01 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
panini press wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/08/justice/texas-randy-travis-arrest/index.html?hpt=hp_c3

lovely. second amendment and texas ki jai ho.
So everybody is talking about this guy. WTF is Randy Travis? What is his claim to fame?

no idea. seems to be some kind of country music type person. i just found the news item on cnn and was struck by the comments that followed the article. every one of them making reference to his drinking problems, but no mention of his threatening to shoot those poor cops. it's at best a footnote to this incident. that's how inured the public has become to gun violence.

Wow. This guy is a total rockstar. Naked, but carrying a weapon? Sounds very frontierexpansionist to me.

by Guest Thu Aug 09, 2012 1:29 am

The article doesn't say anything about this guy being armed. He did threaten, yes.

by Merlot Daruwala Thu Aug 09, 2012 1:42 am

blabberwock wrote:The article doesn't say anything about this guy being armed. He did threaten, yes.

piss drunk, armed, and collapsed in north texas 459784477

Good catch.

So in addition to his constitutionally protected right to bear arms (unexercised in this case), the poor man's most important freedom of speech was also under attack by the east-coast liberals on this board.

by Idéfix Thu Aug 09, 2012 1:49 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:
blabberwock wrote:The article doesn't say anything about this guy being armed. He did threaten, yes.

Good catch.

So in addition to his constitutionally protected right to bear arms (unexercised in this case), the poor man's most important freedom of speech was also under attack by the east-coast liberals on this board.

LOL. Bicoastal is the word.

PS: I wonder why the cops took the threat seriously enough to repeat it to CNN... a naked man can't exactly carry concealed. Perhaps they were worried he had a weapon in his glove compartment or something.

by Merlot Daruwala Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:00 am

panini press wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:
blabberwock wrote:The article doesn't say anything about this guy being armed. He did threaten, yes.

Good catch.

So in addition to his constitutionally protected right to bear arms (unexercised in this case), the poor man's most important freedom of speech was also under attack by the east-coast liberals on this board.
LOL. Bicoastal is the word.

PS: I wonder why the cops took the threat seriously enough to repeat it to CNN... a naked man can't exactly carry concealed. Perhaps they were worried he had a weapon in his glove compartment or something.

Sir, let us stick to facts. As per the story, he only threatened to shoot. He didn't mention with what. And that is the naked truth.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:46 am

Maria S wrote:Sure, take away his gun..but, why this kola veri, kola veri Max? Ithu koncham overilla?

The poor man is obviously going through public humiliation and plenty of legal problems, hope he gets well.

Mariamma:

who does not deserve support and sympathy ?

The rich and famous moron who drinks away screwing his life?

a serial killer?

A freak who kills the sikhs?

Dark batman who mows down people?

A country's head who kills his innocent people left right and center?

The wall Street looters who destroyed the lives of millions?

exactly who ?

by Merlot Daruwala Thu Aug 09, 2012 2:56 am

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:Mariamma: who does not deserve support and sympathy ?

Ooh I know, I know. It is Muslims. They could be at the receiving end of every riot, every pogrom, even genocide. But they shall not get any support or sympathy. Why? Because Upps Unkil was molested by some Muslims when he stepped into the town center after 8 pm many years ago. His trauma shall not go unavenged by those rioters, pogrom-ers and genociders.

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Aug 09, 2012 7:02 am

blabberwock wrote:The article doesn't say anything about this guy being armed. He did threaten, yes.

that's reason enough to take away his gun if he has one. i find it difficult to find humor in these incidents like others seem to, and i don't think i'm particularly humor-impaired.

by Guest Thu Aug 09, 2012 7:22 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
blabberwock wrote:The article doesn't say anything about this guy being armed. He did threaten, yes.

that's reason enough to take away his gun if he has one. i find it difficult to find humor in these incidents like others seem to, and i don't think i'm particularly humor-impaired.

Life is more fun in the wild west - haven't you watched enough westerns?

Apparently, the Wild West had better control, as per this article anyway.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-winkler/did-the-wild-west-have-mo_b_956035.html

Here's a study in contrast:

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/

by Maria S Thu Aug 09, 2012 7:34 am

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
Maria S wrote:Sure, take away his gun..but, why this kola veri, kola veri Max? Ithu koncham overilla?

The poor man is obviously going through public humiliation and plenty of legal problems, hope he gets well.

Mariamma:

who does not deserve support and sympathy ?

exactly who ?

Dear Saamiyar ayya,

You don't..when you ask me silly questions like this dear friend:)

Randy Travis is a well-known, multi-platinum, fab. singer..and I have always enjoyed listening to his songs. He has done nothing to hurt anyone else, but himself (so far)..for goodness sakes, he was drunk, naked and went to buy some cigarettes, and he is not the poster child for gun control.

Yes, he does deserve some support and sympathy from me.

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Aug 09, 2012 7:58 am

blabberwock wrote:

Apparently, the Wild West had better control, as per this article anyway.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/adam-winkler/did-the-wild-west-have-mo_b_956035.html

the comments that follow this article are scary to read. i mean really scary. i think those considering immigrating to the US, or a long term stay in the US should really take the gun culture into account, and in particular if they'd really like to live in states which have total laissez-faire on guns (which is most of the US).

by MaxEntropy_Man Thu Aug 09, 2012 8:54 am

Maria S wrote: ....and he is not the poster child for gun control.

he threatened to shoot cops.

by Guest Thu Aug 09, 2012 9:09 am

by Maria S Thu Aug 09, 2012 10:12 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Maria S wrote: ....and he is not the poster child for gun control.

he threatened to shoot cops.

Knowing how it works in the USA..if someone "threatened to shoot cops" and the cops felt it was a "real threat"..he would have 100 bullets in his body, well 50.. since he is not a minority..and the late. Randy Travis now, imo.

Apparently- since he is a "celebrity"...his bad mugshot went viral..was kind of sensational..with the whole world to have some fun.

by Maria S Thu Aug 09, 2012 10:22 am

Another good song..in his grand baritone voice..

Just a matter of time..

by Maria S Thu Aug 09, 2012 11:02 am

Did not take two mins to find this one..

I'll reserve judgment, until I see the police dashboard video...but, it's kind of intriguing..how a person can commit suicide while he is handcuffed in a police car..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/08/chavis-carter-jonesboro_n_1757860.html

Excerpt:

Before the death of Chavis Carter, shot while handcuffed in the back of a police car, life in Jonesboro was more like a bustling Mayberry than the stuff of "Unsolved Mysteries."

by Hellsangel Sat Aug 11, 2012 10:56 pm

Maria S wrote:

Knowing how it works in the USA..if someone "threatened to shoot cops" and the cops felt it was a "real threat"..he would have 100 bullets in his body, well 50.. since he is not a minority..and the late. Randy Travis now, imo.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/11/13236645-new-york-police-shoot-knife-wielding-man-dead-near-times-square?lite

by MaxEntropy_Man Sat Aug 11, 2012 11:01 pm

yes a knife and a glock. same thing i know.

by Hellsangel Sat Aug 11, 2012 11:16 pm

Have you ever held a glock? Just curious.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sat Aug 11, 2012 11:17 pm

Hellsangel wrote:Have you ever held a glock? Just curious.

i'll answer it if you tell me how this question is relevant.

by Hellsangel Sat Aug 11, 2012 11:28 pm

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:Have you ever held a glock? Just curious.

i'll answer it if you tell me how this question is relevant.

If you did, you probably had respect for it. There is no need to say "glock and knife same thing". Anyone can misuse anything. Commercial planes included.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sat Aug 11, 2012 11:37 pm

the answer is that i have handled firearms, a long time ago when i used to hang out with a grad school friend who had an interest in such things. been with him to some shooting ranges a few times out of curiosity. i don't remember the model, type etc.

anyway back to the point, i am not arguing that anyone can misuse anything. i've already granted that a long time ago. the question is one of how much regulation we are willing to accept. in the continuum of things that can cause damage to one's self and others if mishandled, you have nukes at one end, and a mechanical pencil at the other. i don't think i'd get an argument from you that a nuke needs more regulation than a pencil. where in that continuum do you place a gun that can fire more than ten rounds without reloading?

by Hellsangel Sat Aug 11, 2012 11:43 pm

And who decides that arbitrary number? 10 rounds. 25 rounds? 50 rounds?

by truthbetold Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:38 am

Hell
Civil society has been coming up with such arbitrary numbers throughout its existence. Examples; 55 miles dpeed limit or right wing fav three strikes and you are out law for criminals or a completely illogical no operation after 20 weeks.
Why is it difficult for nra to even agree to discuss controls over assult weapons and ammunition?

by Merlot Daruwala Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:56 am

truthbetold wrote:Hell
Civil society has been coming up with such arbitrary numbers throughout its existence. Examples; 55 miles dpeed limit or right wing fav three strikes and you are out law for criminals or a completely illogical no operation after 20 weeks.
Why is it difficult for nra to even agree to discuss controls over assult weapons and ammunition?

Because that is just the first step in an inevitable slide towards eventually disarming the populace and giving the state a complete monopoly on violence. The right to bear arms is no less precious than the most important right to speech. Neither can be taken for granted. One has to be vigilant on any attempt to limit them.

by truthbetold Sun Aug 12, 2012 7:17 am

There is no philosophical relationship between freedom of speech and bearing arms. Freedom of speech is central to human civil society allowing ideas to clash and evolve. Bearing arms is a misinterpreted US constitutional issue limited to us soil.
the preemptive logic of nra if applied in other affairs means no compromise ever. Tea party is trying causing immense damage. In a civil society groups can discuss opinions and each.side must trust the society to do the right thing. Discussion and evolution of thought is the essence of civil soceity.

by Merlot Daruwala Sun Aug 12, 2012 7:36 am

truthbetold wrote:There is no philosophical relationship between freedom of speech and bearing arms. Freedom of speech is central to human civil society allowing ideas to clash and evolve. Bearing arms is a misinterpreted US constitutional issue limited to us soil.

Rights do not need to have any "philosophical relationship". As long as the constitution protects them, that is sufficient.

truthbetold wrote:the preemptive logic of nra if applied in other affairs means no compromise ever. Tea party is trying causing immense damage. In a civil society groups can discuss opinions and each.side must trust the society to do the right thing. Discussion and evolution of thought is the essence of civil soceity.

Would you be open to similar compromises on the freedom of speech in the name of evolution of thought?

by truthbetold Sun Aug 12, 2012 8:05 am

My opinion is of no consequence. FOS is always a reasonable compromise between the powerful influences of a civil soceity.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Aug 12, 2012 8:36 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:
Would you be open to similar compromises on the freedom of speech in the name of evolution of thought?

there already are such compromises. you can't shout fire in a theater without there actually being a fire. many countries also have defamation and libel laws.

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Aug 12, 2012 9:02 am

Hellsangel wrote:And who decides that arbitrary number? 10 rounds. 25 rounds? 50 rounds?

TBT has already mentioned speed limits. we also limit the amount of pollutants in the environment. as a society we have devised means to come up with quantitative limits to things that need such limits. why is this any more difficult a problem?

by Merlot Daruwala Sun Aug 12, 2012 10:59 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:
Would you be open to similar compromises on the freedom of speech in the name of evolution of thought?

there already are such compromises. you can't shout fire in a theater without there actually being a fire. many countries also have defamation and libel laws.

True. What about demagoguery at a public rally that is bound to inflame passions and lead to mob violence - of the type we saw in Mumbai a couple of days back?

by MaxEntropy_Man Sun Aug 12, 2012 11:11 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:
True. What about demagoguery at a public rally that is bound to inflame passions and lead to mob violence - of the type we saw in Mumbai a couple of days back?

i hear you and THIS really was your point all along. you can now drop the colbert like pretense. if you wanted me to come out and say that in a religiously volatile place like india, maybe free speech needs to be more narrowly defined than elsewhere, you have at least got me thinking.

by truthbetold Sun Aug 12, 2012 11:30 am

India has both religious and political FOS restriction through laws and police highhandedness. Congress in addition imposes sonia/rahul/dynasty criticism restriction through loompen element. Progressive thought is always curbed through.blatant disregard of laws by combined forces of fuedalism police and lumpen elements.
Any inaction such as in mumbai is intentional or ineffective execution of existing laws. More laws.can be added but will only be implemented when it is convinient for ruling entity ex:rss will vigorously implement a mulla spech control and congress will do everything to restrict bjp vote.

by Merlot Daruwala Sun Aug 12, 2012 11:33 am

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:
True. What about demagoguery at a public rally that is bound to inflame passions and lead to mob violence - of the type we saw in Mumbai a couple of days back?

i hear you and THIS really was your point all along. you can now drop the colbert like pretense. if you wanted me to come out and say that in a religiously volatile place like india, maybe free speech needs to be more narrowly defined than elsewhere, you have at least got me thinking.

Thank you.

by Guest Mon Aug 13, 2012 2:23 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:
MaxEntropy_Man wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:
True. What about demagoguery at a public rally that is bound to inflame passions and lead to mob violence - of the type we saw in Mumbai a couple of days back?

i hear you and THIS really was your point all along. you can now drop the colbert like pretense. if you wanted me to come out and say that in a religiously volatile place like india, maybe free speech needs to be more narrowly defined than elsewhere, you have at least got me thinking.

Thank you.

Sneaky!

by Idéfix Mon Aug 13, 2012 2:54 am

Hellsangel wrote:And who decides that arbitrary number? 10 rounds. 25 rounds? 50 rounds?

Elected representatives of the people.

by Sponsored content