ANOTHER Death Threat from a Typical Mountain Biker

Stating that you will defend yourself vigorously IF ATTACKED is not a threat and is 100% legal since you have a right of self defence.
Perhaps your lack of understanding contributed to you committing battery ?
[i]
She didn't say "if attacked", LIAR. She said "if put my hands on her", so her response is disproportionate to the alleged threat, which is all based on a lie, anyway. I have never "attacked" anyone. And I didn't commit battery. The mountain biker ran into ME, so HE committed battery. DUH!

If you put your hands on her then that is battery ... which is an attack and against which she is perfectly entitled to defend herself.

Homicide is not a justified/legal response to battery. DUH! I don't know why you still keep talking, when you can't prove a single point.

Actually, it usually is ... but does depend on the circumstances. Essentially, if you institute an attack then the victim is entitled to defend themselves. If, in such defence, you end up dead then that would normally not be grounds for homicide. If you start something then you have to live (or die) by the consquences.

We can joust on the technicalities all day. However, the reality of the situation is that there is no "credible threat to your life" and therefore this is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a death threat. You're just trolling again ... grow up.

And, interestingly, I note that you don't notice the parallel with your own situation. Your response to a misdemeanour/civil matter was completely disproportionate and lead to you committing battery.

On Thursday, November 8, 2012 3:05:09 AM UTC-8, Blackblade wrote:[i]
Stating that you will defend yourself vigorously IF ATTACKED is not a threat and is 100% legal since you have a right of self defence.

Perhaps your lack of understanding contributed to you committing battery ?



She didn't say "if attacked", LIAR. She said "if put my hands on her", so her response is disproportionate to the alleged threat, which is all based on a lie, anyway. I have never "attacked" anyone. And I didn't commit battery. The mountain biker ran into ME, so HE committed battery. DUH!



If you put your hands on her then that is battery ... which is an attack and against which she is perfectly entitled to defend herself.



Homicide is not a justified/legal response to battery. DUH! I don't know why you still keep talking, when you can't prove a single point.



Actually, it usually is ... but does depend on the circumstances. Essentially, if you institute an attack then the victim is entitled to defend themselves. If, in such defence, you end up dead then that would normally not be grounds for homicide. If you start something then you have to live (or die) by the consquences.



We can joust on the technicalities all day. However, the reality of the situation is that there is no "credible threat to your life" and therefore this is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a death threat. You're just trolling again ... grow up.



And, interestingly, I note that you don't notice the parallel with your own situation. Your response to a misdemeanour/civil matter was completely disproportionate and lead to you committing battery.

You sure are a glutton for punishment! First, homicide is not a justifiable response to touching, so stop pretending that it is.

Second, you have no idea what actually happened (I do, since I was there), so you are LYING when you pretend to know. That's nothing new for mountain bikers. "Liar" is their middle name. You prove that every single time you open your mouth. What's a mystery is why you keep doing it, no matter how many times you are refuted and shown to be a fool. Are you a masochist, too?

You sure are a glutton for punishment! First, homicide is not a justifiable response to touching, so stop pretending that it is.

No-one really threatened you with homicide either ... so stop pretending that they did !

Second, you have no idea what actually happened (I do, since I was there), so you are LYING when you pretend to know. That's nothing new for mountain bikers. "Liar" is their middle name. You prove that every single time you open your mouth. What's a mystery is why you keep doing it, no matter how many times you are refuted and shown to be a fool. Are you a masochist, too?

Well, since you posted probably rather more than you intended in a parallel thread a href="https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.mountain-bike/g6-looFBysM/nYQ7Q36X8akJ" Here /a I guess you might want to reconsider your statement. You provided prima facie evidence of your own guilt !

And, to date, I can't think of a single refutation that would be adjudged as such by anyone other than you. Your logic seems to run to "I say it is so ... therefore it is so ... QED".

Since this doesn't usually suffice for anyone else I would hesitate to claim victory so presumptiously. Perhaps we should invite votes as to the outcome ... or, perhaps, appoint a jury to adjudge the result ???? :-) :-)

Oh, no, sorry, forgot that you don't believe in juries ... unless they produce the result you want !

On Friday, November 9, 2012 2:36:19 AM UTC-8, Blackblade wrote:
You sure are a glutton for punishment! First, homicide is not a justifiable response to touching, so stop pretending that it is.



No-one really threatened you with homicide either ... so stop pretending that they did !

"I will rip your head off and crush it with my bike". Your lies are SOOO easy to refute!

Second, you have no idea what actually happened (I do, since I was there), so you are LYING when you pretend to know. That's nothing new for mountain bikers. "Liar" is their middle name. You prove that every single time you open your mouth. What's a mystery is why you keep doing it, no matter how many times you are refuted and shown to be a fool. Are you a masochist, too?



Well, since you posted probably rather more than you intended in a parallel thread a href="https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.mountain-bike/g6-looFBysM/nYQ7Q36X8akJ" Here /a I guess you might want to reconsider your statement. You provided prima facie evidence of your own guilt !

BS. Refuted again. Without specifics, we must assume you are bluffing. AGAIN.

And, to date, I can't think of a single refutation that would be adjudged as such by anyone other than you. Your logic seems to run to "I say it is so ... therefore it is so ... QED".



Since this doesn't usually suffice for anyone else I would hesitate to claim victory so presumptiously. Perhaps we should invite votes as to the outcome ... or, perhaps, appoint a jury to adjudge the result ???? :-) :-)



Oh, no, sorry, forgot that you don't believe in juries ... unless they produce the result you want !

Liar. You now stoop to pure fantasy. NO judge or jury can be accurate, since they really don't know the facts. But you (and everyone else) already knew that, liar.

No-one really threatened you with homicide either ... so stop pretending that they did !

"I will rip your head off and crush it with my bike". Your lies are SOOO easy to refute!

Oh yes ? The legal offense is actually one of 'Coercion' ... you have not been coerced to do anything that you might otherwise have done nor refrain from doing something to which you are legally entitled. You are NOT legally entitled to lay hands on (assault) this individual. If you don't believe me take it to the police ... they take real death threats very seriously.

And, as ever, you resort to accusing everyone of lying. Where ? Idiot.

Second, you have no idea what actually happened (I do, since I was there), so you are LYING when you pretend to know. That's nothing new for mountain bikers. "Liar" is their middle name. You prove that every single time you open your mouth. What's a mystery is why you keep doing it, no matter how many times you are refuted and shown to be a fool. Are you a masochist, too?

Well, since you posted probably rather more than you intended in a parallel thread a href="https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.mountain-bike/g6-looFBysM/nYQ7Q36X8akJ" Here /a I guess you might want to reconsider your statement. You provided prima facie evidence of your own guilt !



BS. Refuted again. Without specifics, we must assume you are bluffing. AGAIN.

The specifics are in the other thread, which I have referenced, where is your refutation ? "BS" is not a refutation.

For a supposedly smart guy skilled in maths and logic you fail on the most basic of logical operands.

Since this doesn't usually suffice for anyone else I would hesitate to claim victory so presumptiously. Perhaps we should invite votes as to the outcome ... or, perhaps, appoint a jury to adjudge the result ???? :-) :-)

Oh, no, sorry, forgot that you don't believe in juries ... unless they produce the result you want !

Liar. You now stoop to pure fantasy. NO judge or jury can be accurate, since they really don't know the facts. But you (and everyone else) already knew that, liar.

Where is the lie Mike ? I am simply pointing out that whilst you might claim victory in your own mind I strongly suspect that an impartial group viewing this thread might not agree with that. Didn't realise you were so touchy about the word 'jury' :-)

Your approach to debate appears to be ... throw out ludicrous proposition .... provide zero back-up beyond 'I say so' when challenged ... then claim victory in the subsequent debate irrespective of having your head handed to you on a plate.

On Friday, November 9, 2012 4:35:01 AM UTC-8, Blackblade wrote:
No-one really threatened you with homicide either ... so stop pretending that they did !



"I will rip your head off and crush it with my bike". Your lies are SOOO easy to refute!



Oh yes ? The legal offense is actually one of 'Coercion' ... you have not been coerced to do anything that you might otherwise have done nor refrain from doing something to which you are legally entitled. You are NOT legally entitled to lay hands on (assault) this individual. If you don't believe me take it to the police ... they take real death threats very seriously..

You make no sense. Threatening homicide is against the law. Why is that so hard for you to admit??? Because a mountain biker did it? That's dishonest.

And, as ever, you resort to accusing everyone of lying. Where ? Idiot.



Second, you have no idea what actually happened (I do, since I was there), so you are LYING when you pretend to know. That's nothing new for mountain bikers. "Liar" is their middle name. You prove that every single time you open your mouth. What's a mystery is why you keep doing it, no matter how many times you are refuted and shown to be a fool. Are you a masochist, too?



Well, since you posted probably rather more than you intended in a parallel thread a href="https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.mountain-bike/g6-looFBysM/nYQ7Q36X8akJ" Here /a I guess you might want to reconsider your statement. You provided prima facie evidence of your own guilt !







BS. Refuted again. Without specifics, we must assume you are bluffing. AGAIN.



The specifics are in the other thread, which I have referenced, where is your refutation ? "BS" is not a refutation.

"In the other thread" is not specific enough to know what you are talking about, as you well know.

For a supposedly smart guy skilled in maths and logic you fail on the most basic of logical operands.



Since this doesn't usually suffice for anyone else I would hesitate to claim victory so presumptiously. Perhaps we should invite votes as to the outcome ... or, perhaps, appoint a jury to adjudge the result ???? :-) :-)



Oh, no, sorry, forgot that you don't believe in juries ... unless they produce the result you want !



Liar. You now stoop to pure fantasy. NO judge or jury can be accurate, since they really don't know the facts. But you (and everyone else) already knew that, liar.



Where is the lie Mike ?

Right in front of your eyes, of course: "you don't believe in juries ... unless they produce the result you want". You are so used to lying and thinking that you are telling the truth, that you don't even know what a lie is -- like ALL mountain bikers.

I am simply pointing out that whilst you might claim victory in your own mind I strongly suspect that an impartial group viewing this thread might not agree with that. Didn't realise you were so touchy about the word 'jury' :-)



Your approach to debate appears to be ... throw out ludicrous proposition ... provide zero back-up beyond 'I say so' when challenged ... then claim victory in the subsequent debate irrespective of having your head handed to you on a plate.

BS. You think that fabricating stuff is okay. It's not. It's a waste of time talking to an incorrigible LIAR like you. Goodbye.