|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7 [Next] | ||||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
Lol, well, I think we need to ask, would there be any other form of censorship there? Would they have someone removed simply for yelling, "fire" or otherwise? Or perhaps for being unsightly?
Similar to the way they would treat a "public" library. In other words "open" to the public, but not treated as "public" property. Also similar to how public schools are viewed when it comes to free speech, or even public access.
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
HerbLarry Special user Poof! 731 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-11-29 19:31, gdw wrote: Yeah you are probably right as I'm discussing reality.
You know why don't act naive.
|
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-11-30 09:49, HerbLarry wrote:
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
critter Inner circle Spokane, WA 2653 Posts |
A movie theatre is not 'open to the public' in the strictest sense. It is private property open to paying customers only. They can refuse service or remove you for any reason they see fit.
Drunk guy tried to light up a cigarette during Saw-3D when I was there. Some lady reported him and an usher asked him to leave. He refused and 5 more ushers came back with the first one. That time he left.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers |
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-11-30 10:55, critter wrote: Largely my point, but as mentioned, I would really like to try and come up with a better example. It seems to essentially be one of the problems of "public" property. I wonder if anyone would be holding one accountable for yelling "fire," or similar, in a public park?
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
RS1963 Inner circle 2734 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-11-29 23:21, gdw wrote: I didn't miss anything. The one that would be accountable would be the guy that was arrested. He would have been the cause of any panic and any injuries that could have happened. It would not have been the F.B.I's or the fault of anyone else. |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Oh no not another one of those FBI agent provocateur Christmas specials. Consider yourself duped again muggles.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-11-30 11:02, RS1963 wrote: Really? You honestly think that, if a civilian was harmed in an act staged by the FBI, police, or the like, that those organizing said operation would not be considered responsible? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Hoffman http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/11/17/31908.htm Those are incidents in which an informant working with the police was killed. What do you think the reaction would be like if a by standard was harmed or killed as a direct result of such an operation?
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
RS1963 Inner circle 2734 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-11-30 11:20, gdw wrote: The two links you provided doesn't prove what you are trying to say at all. The court may rule in favor of the mother of the woman that was killed. Also did I say that no one would try to sue the F.B.I.? I did not say that all I said was that the suspect was the cause. Even when someone sues in a case like what you sighted here. It doesn't mean that the officers were right or wrong. All it means is that the case does have enough merit to be heard in court. It doesn't mean anything other than that till after the proceedings are over. Also the case you linked to isn't quite the same thing. It's close but all in all not the same as the hypothetical that you produced. |
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
And I NEVER said they WERE right or wrong. ALL I was EVER asking was IF people WOULD hold them accountable. So, the links I provided prove EXACTLY that. Jesus, again, please try to focus on what I ACTUALLY say and not what you insist on inferring into my posts.
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
RS1963 Inner circle 2734 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-11-30 12:04, gdw wrote: It really doesn't "PROVE" that anyone would hold them accountable. Each situation is different. Could it be possible that someone would try to hold them accountable? Sure but doesn't mean for a fact that anyone would. It would help if YOU understood such things before YOU posted. |
|||||||||
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts |
Might I suggest that you guys are intending different meanings of the word "accountable"? I think your apparent dispute is purely semantic.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
RS1963 Inner circle 2734 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-11-30 12:26, LobowolfXXX wrote: In who would be accountable sure we are disagreeing on that. But I highly doubt that the meaning of the word accountable is in question. But then again we are talking gdw here;-) Yes I did add the right or wrong issue in there. But for someone to want to hold another accountable for a wrong. That is an instant assumption of guilt of causing the actions is it not? |
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-11-30 12:19, RS1963 wrote: Pardon, I miss spoke using the term "prove." Of course I don't doubt that if I had said the links show people would be LIKELY to (a least try to) hold them accountable that you would have still tried to fins a way to disagree with me about it. Any who, I wasn't ever intending to "prove" anything anyways as I was merely ASKING if anyone thought they would, or should be held accountable. Why the hell you thought a question needed arguing with is beyond me. Oh wait, no, it's because you tend to argue with almost everything I post, regardless of whether or not you actually read what I right or not.
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
RS1963 Inner circle 2734 Posts |
[quote]On 2010-11-30 13:08, gdw wrote:
Quote:
No. I would not have certainly wouldn't have even thought about it had you posted your links at the very start. Now you're just trying to argue for the sake of argument. B.t.w. for your information I completely read whatever and whoever's post I am responding too. Otherwise I would have no need to respond now would I? |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
No he's not.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
RS1963 Inner circle 2734 Posts |
Tommy you are just here for an argument. But I can't argue unless you've paid.
|
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
No he's not! He's here for an argument.
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
RS1963 Inner circle 2734 Posts |
Shut your festering gob you twit. Your kind makes me want to puke you malodorus pervert!.......... Oh I'm sorry this is abuse!....................Stupid git.
|
|||||||||
gdw Inner circle 4884 Posts |
For a second there, I thought your account had been hijacked by a certain Mark.
"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."
I won't forget you Robert. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Consider yourself defended (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |