First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Post Reply Eritrean migrants crashed party, shot the host after calling him a racist, then was let go because he didn't know a gun
22720 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 12/7/17

sundin13 wrote:


Rujikin wrote:


I never said it was fatal or anyone died how was it misleading?

A gun is always loaded. You never point a gun at someone unless you intend to kill them because if the gun just happens to be loaded you may shoot them. Even guns that shoot rubber balls and blanks could have a pebble in them. Even if they are just a rubber bullet it can still kill if you are hit in the right spot and even a blank can injure.

There is a reason the punishment for mishandling guns is pretty heavy. I'm surprised you don't agree considering how you seem to be for gun control.

I already said what happened. You can read from the translation well enough if you know english well.



You are right. With my English skills, I should easily be able to understand stuff like this:
"He flew to Africa and a wrestling match occurred. "
"Free Times has previously written about the attack on the private crayfish plate"
"The values ​for the cancer plate acted flashlessly"

Damn cancer plates acting flashlessly on those crayfish during a wrestling match in Africa.

But anyways, stating that someone was shot holds the assumption that they were shot with an actual bullet and either died or suffered serious wounds. Sure, I could technically say "I shot my sister ten times and then ate dinner" and you would think "What a monster!" and then I could say "I just shot her with a water gun!". By leaving out that information you are misleading by omission.

Further, the same could be said with your gun statements. You act like "of course he should have known that a bullet would come out", but if it was a gun designed to fire blanks, you may not expect projectiles to come out. By not stating that this wasn't a true "gun", you are misleading the reader.

The OP should be written in a way to start from a place of knowledge, not spread propaganda and leave it to the readers to sift through your terrible sources (seriously, where do you even find this garbage?). There is no reason for this thread other than blind propaganda. It is impossible to figure out the facts of the case with google translate so the only thing that can be reasonably obtained through this thread is poorly justified hatred.


"Free Times has previously written about the attack on the private crayfish plate" - I could understand that. Eh, maybe being able to read that is thanks to our great American education system.

He was shot with an actual bullet, did you not see the picture? A bullet is literally any round or bullet shaped object. We used to use smooth rocks in muskets. Being shot also does not imply anyone dies unless it is said he dies or it was a fatal gunshot. People survive being shot all the time especially on the battlefield, death to infection is more common in a major war.

A true gun is any gun that fires projectiles under high pressure. That gun fit all the requirements plus it had a rubber bullet in there. Even without a bullet it is still a concentrated high explosive being shot at someone. Besides.. do you really want people running around threatening people with fake guns? Aren't you anti-gun and want to stop that? Or are you just taking the opposite stance of whatever stance I make and ignoring everything you have ever said about how dangerous guns are?


That's pretty rude to call Swedish sources garbage and you call me a Xenophobe.
543 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
57 / M
Offline
Posted 12/7/17

Rujikin wrote:


sundin13 wrote:

Okay, even wading through the awful google translate, I can tell that your OP is wildly misleading. The injury seems to be a non-fatal shot to the leg, and the gun was something designed to shoot rubber balls or blanks, so it actually isn't designed to fire anything. Overall, its tough to tell exactly what happened due to the translation, but whatever the case, the OP is pretty terrible.


I never said it was fatal or anyone died how was it misleading?



A gun is always loaded. You never point a gun at someone unless you intend to kill them because if the gun just happens to be loaded you may shoot them. Even guns that shoot rubber balls and blanks could have a pebble in them. Even if they are just a rubber bullet it can still kill if you are hit in the right spot and even a blank can injure.

There is a reason the punishment for mishandling guns is pretty heavy. I'm surprised you don't agree considering how you seem to be for gun control.

I already said what happened. You can read from the translation well enough if you know english well.


Simple request - provide the name of the person convicted of this action )public record if he was sentenced). I cannot find this and my friends in Sweden (Uppsala, which is about an hour away) do not recall hearing about it.

The only mention of this activity is from a well-known alt-right publication which has a rather poor reputation (FriaTider). All other articles reference FriaTider as the source.
Banned
519 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / Morioh, Japan
Offline
Posted 12/7/17 , edited 12/7/17

Rujikin wrote:

That's pretty rude to call Swedish sources garbage and you call me a Xenophobe.


YOU CANT EVEN READ THE ARTICLE

Imagine citing something you can't even read.

Imagine trying to figure out what happened in a Swedish criminal court based on an article you can't even read.

And imagine whining and calling someone rude because you are citing something you can't even read and doing that while pushing Xenophobe politics while barely grasping anything involving this situation.

I can't even. I just can't. I can't. I can't.

You don't even know if the gun was actually even a firearm, so all this talk about what bullets are is completely meaningless. Why do you know the definition of bullet, but not know the definition of firearm? Why? Why would you assume this is a firearm given the context of rubber? I mean, it's Sweden, so it's probably not safe to just automatically assume there are firearms laying around for noncitizens to just pick up. We don't know even know the model of the supposed firearm. We don't even know why the defendant was released. We don't know anything about Swedish gun laws and how they define a firearm. We don't know what he was charged with. I don't even know if he was found not guilty.

Hell, it's a Swedish court and not America so I would bet that their version of conservative politics doesn't sponsor a literal Prison-Industrial Complex in their country like American conservatives gladly do. But, because we can't even read the article, we have no way of actually knowing any of this because you made this topic based on multiple layers of assumptions.


tomas123987 wrote:

The only mention of this activity is from a well-known alt-right publication which has a rather poor reputation (FriaTider). All other articles reference FriaTider as the source.


Wow, is anyone really shocked? Probably not.
3330 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / North America
Online
Posted 12/7/17

LakeJucas wrote:




tomas123987 wrote:

The only mention of this activity is from a well-known alt-right publication which has a rather poor reputation (FriaTider). All other articles reference FriaTider as the source.


Wow, is anyone really shocked? Probably not.


well the alt-right is well known for their fake news so I am not suprised
1938 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M / Valhalla
Offline
Posted 12/7/17
Good grief, what's going on here?
23336 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M / So. Cal
Offline
Posted 12/7/17
I suggest traveling to Sweden, shooting the guy and trying the same defence he did
Posted 12/8/17

sundin13 wrote:

Okay, even wading through the awful google translate, I can tell that your OP is wildly misleading. The injury seems to be a non-fatal shot to the leg, and the gun was something designed to shoot rubber balls or blanks, so it actually isn't designed to fire anything. Overall, its tough to tell exactly what happened due to the translation, but whatever the case, the OP is pretty terrible.


It's a "start" gun you shoot at the start of a race event apparently. Sounds like some ethnic Swedish people were having a party and the Eritrean man got into a spat with them over the sound of the music and proceeded to shoot one of them in the leg point blank. There were also accusations that the ethnic Swedish people were being called "racist" during the interaction.
15668 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 12/8/17

Rujikin wrote:

"Free Times has previously written about the attack on the private crayfish plate" - I could understand that. Eh, maybe being able to read that is thanks to our great American education system.

He was shot with an actual bullet, did you not see the picture? A bullet is literally any round or bullet shaped object. We used to use smooth rocks in muskets. Being shot also does not imply anyone dies unless it is said he dies or it was a fatal gunshot. People survive being shot all the time especially on the battlefield, death to infection is more common in a major war.

A true gun is any gun that fires projectiles under high pressure. That gun fit all the requirements plus it had a rubber bullet in there. Even without a bullet it is still a concentrated high explosive being shot at someone. Besides.. do you really want people running around threatening people with fake guns? Aren't you anti-gun and want to stop that? Or are you just taking the opposite stance of whatever stance I make and ignoring everything you have ever said about how dangerous guns are?


That's pretty rude to call Swedish sources garbage and you call me a Xenophobe.


But seriously, what in the actual fuck is a "private crayfish plate"? And I'm not calling your sources garbage because they are Swedish, they are garbage because you have to read them through google translate which leaves you with phrases like "cancer plate".

As for the rest, my problem isn't "gun control", my problem is "bullshit". This thread has a lot of the latter. Again, when you say "he shot someone with a gun" typically you think "he fired a bullet out of a firearm designed to shoot standard bullets" not "he fired a rubber ball out of a 'starter gun' which is designed to fire blanks". By omitting key details you are lying by omission, trying to convince readers that this altercation is a significantly bigger deal than it actually was and that the defendant's statement was more ludicrous than it actually was. No, you weren't technically lying, but that doesn't mean you were being fully honest.

For example, I could write the following statement without technically lying to purposefully mislead readers:

The subject went to a party and shot several people in the chest and head. Later, two of the victims passed away.

Sounds pretty bad. But what if I told you what actually happened was the following:

The subject went to a party and played with water guns, shooting several people in the chest and head. Later, two of the other people playing with water guns died in an unrelated car crash.

I didn't lie in that first statement, but I really wasn't being honest in the way I portrayed the events.
22720 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 12/8/17

tomas123987 wrote:


Rujikin wrote:


sundin13 wrote:

Simple request - provide the name of the person convicted of this action )public record if he was sentenced). I cannot find this and my friends in Sweden (Uppsala, which is about an hour away) do not recall hearing about it.

The only mention of this activity is from a well-known alt-right publication which has a rather poor reputation (FriaTider). All other articles reference FriaTider as the source.


The article seems to have avoided saying the name. Its written up almost like how Florida articles are written where you cannot say the name of the person only that he was a Floridan Man/Woman. Are you sure they can even release the name legally?


LakeJucas wrote:
YOU CANT EVEN READ THE ARTICLE

Imagine citing something you can't even read.

Imagine trying to figure out what happened in a Swedish criminal court based on an article you can't even read.

And imagine whining and calling someone rude because you are citing something you can't even read and doing that while pushing Xenophobe politics while barely grasping anything involving this situation.

I can't even. I just can't. I can't. I can't.

You don't even know if the gun was actually even a firearm, so all this talk about what bullets are is completely meaningless. Why do you know the definition of bullet, but not know the definition of firearm? Why? Why would you assume this is a firearm given the context of rubber? I mean, it's Sweden, so it's probably not safe to just automatically assume there are firearms laying around for noncitizens to just pick up. We don't know even know the model of the supposed firearm. We don't even know why the defendant was released. We don't know anything about Swedish gun laws and how they define a firearm. We don't know what he was charged with. I don't even know if he was found not guilty.

Hell, it's a Swedish court and not America so I would bet that their version of conservative politics doesn't sponsor a literal Prison-Industrial Complex in their country like American conservatives gladly do. But, because we can't even read the article, we have no way of actually knowing any of this because you made this topic based on multiple layers of assumptions.


tomas123987 wrote:

The only mention of this activity is from a well-known alt-right publication which has a rather poor reputation (FriaTider). All other articles reference FriaTider as the source.


Wow, is anyone really shocked? Probably not.


We even have klingon and elvish translators. BRING IT ON!!! I NOT SCARED OF FOREIGN WORDS! WORDS DO NOT SCARE ME!

Haha you've written this like a perfect stereotype thanks for the laugh.

Firearm (N): a small arms weapon, as a rifle or pistol, from which a projectile is fired by gunpowder.

^ To add to this you can use stuff beyond gunpower but that is just prevalent right now.

Haha dang is this what people used to be like before the age of translators. I am so glad we have the internet to connect and translate for us.


sundin13 wrote:


Rujikin wrote:

"Free Times has previously written about the attack on the private crayfish plate" - I could understand that. Eh, maybe being able to read that is thanks to our great American education system.

He was shot with an actual bullet, did you not see the picture? A bullet is literally any round or bullet shaped object. We used to use smooth rocks in muskets. Being shot also does not imply anyone dies unless it is said he dies or it was a fatal gunshot. People survive being shot all the time especially on the battlefield, death to infection is more common in a major war.

A true gun is any gun that fires projectiles under high pressure. That gun fit all the requirements plus it had a rubber bullet in there. Even without a bullet it is still a concentrated high explosive being shot at someone. Besides.. do you really want people running around threatening people with fake guns? Aren't you anti-gun and want to stop that? Or are you just taking the opposite stance of whatever stance I make and ignoring everything you have ever said about how dangerous guns are?


That's pretty rude to call Swedish sources garbage and you call me a Xenophobe.


But seriously, what in the actual fuck is a "private crayfish plate"? And I'm not calling your sources garbage because they are Swedish, they are garbage because you have to read them through google translate which leaves you with phrases like "cancer plate".

As for the rest, my problem isn't "gun control", my problem is "bullshit". This thread has a lot of the latter. Again, when you say "he shot someone with a gun" typically you think "he fired a bullet out of a firearm designed to shoot standard bullets" not "he fired a rubber ball out of a 'starter gun' which is designed to fire blanks". By omitting key details you are lying by omission, trying to convince readers that this altercation is a significantly bigger deal than it actually was and that the defendant's statement was more ludicrous than it actually was. No, you weren't technically lying, but that doesn't mean you were being fully honest.

For example, I could write the following statement without technically lying to purposefully mislead readers:

The subject went to a party and shot several people in the chest and head. Later, two of the victims passed away.

Sounds pretty bad. But what if I told you what actually happened was the following:

The subject went to a party and played with water guns, shooting several people in the chest and head. Later, two of the other people playing with water guns died in an unrelated car crash.

I didn't lie in that first statement, but I really wasn't being honest in the way I portrayed the events.


A private party. You should be able to tell just by context if English is your first language.

Firearm (N): a small arms weapon, as a rifle or pistol, from which a projectile is fired by gunpowder.

A gun can take many shapes. It used to take the shape of a single shot metal barrel with a rock wrapped in cloth. Just because the form and shape of the ammo changes doesn't make it different from a gun. Also why did he have a rubber bullet in with his blanks? I did not omit any key details. It's your fault that you don't understand what a gun or a bullet is.

I'm sure the guy who got shot didn't think it was a minor deal, thats a pretty nasty wound:



You misdirected there. I said he got shot with a gun and he did get shot with a gun. No deception. You just opened your mouth too early and now your trying to defend your previous statements, quite fruitlessly i might add.
15668 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 12/8/17
But seriously, what does that have to do with crawfish?



As for the rest, I never claimed that anything you said in your OP was false, only that it was misleading (which it was). I think I've made my point that you misled by excluding relevant facts in order to push your propagandized viewpoint about as clear as I can and you present nothing to really counteract those points so I guess we are done here.
543 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
57 / M
Offline
Posted 12/8/17

Rujikin wrote:


tomas123987 wrote:


Rujikin wrote:


sundin13 wrote:

Simple request - provide the name of the person convicted of this action )public record if he was sentenced). I cannot find this and my friends in Sweden (Uppsala, which is about an hour away) do not recall hearing about it.

The only mention of this activity is from a well-known alt-right publication which has a rather poor reputation (FriaTider). All other articles reference FriaTider as the source.


The article seems to have avoided saying the name. Its written up almost like how Florida articles are written where you cannot say the name of the person only that he was a Floridan Man/Woman. Are you sure they can even release the name legally?


LakeJucas wrote:
YOU CANT EVEN READ THE ARTICLE

Imagine citing something you can't even read.

Imagine trying to figure out what happened in a Swedish criminal court based on an article you can't even read.

And imagine whining and calling someone rude because you are citing something you can't even read and doing that while pushing Xenophobe politics while barely grasping anything involving this situation.

I can't even. I just can't. I can't. I can't.

You don't even know if the gun was actually even a firearm, so all this talk about what bullets are is completely meaningless. Why do you know the definition of bullet, but not know the definition of firearm? Why? Why would you assume this is a firearm given the context of rubber? I mean, it's Sweden, so it's probably not safe to just automatically assume there are firearms laying around for noncitizens to just pick up. We don't know even know the model of the supposed firearm. We don't even know why the defendant was released. We don't know anything about Swedish gun laws and how they define a firearm. We don't know what he was charged with. I don't even know if he was found not guilty.

Hell, it's a Swedish court and not America so I would bet that their version of conservative politics doesn't sponsor a literal Prison-Industrial Complex in their country like American conservatives gladly do. But, because we can't even read the article, we have no way of actually knowing any of this because you made this topic based on multiple layers of assumptions.


tomas123987 wrote:

The only mention of this activity is from a well-known alt-right publication which has a rather poor reputation (FriaTider). All other articles reference FriaTider as the source.


Wow, is anyone really shocked? Probably not.


We even have klingon and elvish translators. BRING IT ON!!! I NOT SCARED OF FOREIGN WORDS! WORDS DO NOT SCARE ME!

Haha you've written this like a perfect stereotype thanks for the laugh.

Firearm (N): a small arms weapon, as a rifle or pistol, from which a projectile is fired by gunpowder.

^ To add to this you can use stuff beyond gunpower but that is just prevalent right now.

Haha dang is this what people used to be like before the age of translators. I am so glad we have the internet to connect and translate for us.


sundin13 wrote:


Rujikin wrote:

"Free Times has previously written about the attack on the private crayfish plate" - I could understand that. Eh, maybe being able to read that is thanks to our great American education system.

He was shot with an actual bullet, did you not see the picture? A bullet is literally any round or bullet shaped object. We used to use smooth rocks in muskets. Being shot also does not imply anyone dies unless it is said he dies or it was a fatal gunshot. People survive being shot all the time especially on the battlefield, death to infection is more common in a major war.

A true gun is any gun that fires projectiles under high pressure. That gun fit all the requirements plus it had a rubber bullet in there. Even without a bullet it is still a concentrated high explosive being shot at someone. Besides.. do you really want people running around threatening people with fake guns? Aren't you anti-gun and want to stop that? Or are you just taking the opposite stance of whatever stance I make and ignoring everything you have ever said about how dangerous guns are?


That's pretty rude to call Swedish sources garbage and you call me a Xenophobe.


But seriously, what in the actual fuck is a "private crayfish plate"? And I'm not calling your sources garbage because they are Swedish, they are garbage because you have to read them through google translate which leaves you with phrases like "cancer plate".

As for the rest, my problem isn't "gun control", my problem is "bullshit". This thread has a lot of the latter. Again, when you say "he shot someone with a gun" typically you think "he fired a bullet out of a firearm designed to shoot standard bullets" not "he fired a rubber ball out of a 'starter gun' which is designed to fire blanks". By omitting key details you are lying by omission, trying to convince readers that this altercation is a significantly bigger deal than it actually was and that the defendant's statement was more ludicrous than it actually was. No, you weren't technically lying, but that doesn't mean you were being fully honest.

For example, I could write the following statement without technically lying to purposefully mislead readers:

The subject went to a party and shot several people in the chest and head. Later, two of the victims passed away.

Sounds pretty bad. But what if I told you what actually happened was the following:

The subject went to a party and played with water guns, shooting several people in the chest and head. Later, two of the other people playing with water guns died in an unrelated car crash.

I didn't lie in that first statement, but I really wasn't being honest in the way I portrayed the events.


A private party. You should be able to tell just by context if English is your first language.

Firearm (N): a small arms weapon, as a rifle or pistol, from which a projectile is fired by gunpowder.

A gun can take many shapes. It used to take the shape of a single shot metal barrel with a rock wrapped in cloth. Just because the form and shape of the ammo changes doesn't make it different from a gun. Also why did he have a rubber bullet in with his blanks? I did not omit any key details. It's your fault that you don't understand what a gun or a bullet is.

I'm sure the guy who got shot didn't think it was a minor deal, thats a pretty nasty wound:



You misdirected there. I said he got shot with a gun and he did get shot with a gun. No deception. You just opened your mouth too early and now your trying to defend your previous statements, quite fruitlessly i might add.


Please provide the name of the individual who committed this "act." In other words, provide some link other than an alt-right publication which is known for sensationalization and outright fabrication. Once we have the name, court record, etc. then we can discuss the facts of the case.
22720 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 12/8/17

sundin13 wrote:

But seriously, what does that have to do with crawfish?



As for the rest, I never claimed that anything you said in your OP was false, only that it was misleading (which it was). I think I've made my point that you misled by excluding relevant facts in order to push your propagandized viewpoint about as clear as I can and you present nothing to really counteract those points so I guess we are done here.


Obviously google hired Forest Gump to perform the translation.

Firearm (N): a small arms weapon, as a rifle or pistol, from which a projectile is fired by gunpowder.

Gun (N): (1) a weapon consisting of a metal tube, with mechanical attachments, from which projectiles are shot by the force of an explosive; a piece of ordnance.
(4) any device for shooting something under pressure:
15668 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 12/8/17

Rujikin wrote:

Gun (N): (4) any device for shooting something under pressure:




Best gun.
543 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
57 / M
Offline
Posted 12/8/17

Rujikin wrote:


sundin13 wrote:

But seriously, what does that have to do with crawfish?



As for the rest, I never claimed that anything you said in your OP was false, only that it was misleading (which it was). I think I've made my point that you misled by excluding relevant facts in order to push your propagandized viewpoint about as clear as I can and you present nothing to really counteract those points so I guess we are done here.


Obviously google hired Forest Gump to perform the translation.

Firearm (N): a small arms weapon, as a rifle or pistol, from which a projectile is fired by gunpowder.

Gun (N): (1) a weapon consisting of a metal tube, with mechanical attachments, from which projectiles are shot by the force of an explosive; a piece of ordnance.
(4) any device for shooting something under pressure:


Please provide the name of the individual who committed the alleged act in Sweden or any court document. Provide some proof other than a link to an unreliable newspaper
22720 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 12/9/17 , edited 12/9/17

tomas123987 wrote:


Rujikin wrote:


sundin13 wrote:

But seriously, what does that have to do with crawfish?



As for the rest, I never claimed that anything you said in your OP was false, only that it was misleading (which it was). I think I've made my point that you misled by excluding relevant facts in order to push your propagandized viewpoint about as clear as I can and you present nothing to really counteract those points so I guess we are done here.


Obviously google hired Forest Gump to perform the translation.

Firearm (N): a small arms weapon, as a rifle or pistol, from which a projectile is fired by gunpowder.

Gun (N): (1) a weapon consisting of a metal tube, with mechanical attachments, from which projectiles are shot by the force of an explosive; a piece of ordnance.
(4) any device for shooting something under pressure:


Please provide the name of the individual who committed the alleged act in Sweden or any court document. Provide some proof other than a link to an unreliable newspaper


Is that even legal under their laws? They might have Florida type name protection laws where you cannot state the name of the man only their description.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.