GetAwayFromMe said:

I'm not even gonna comment about that video, some of you won't like what I have to say.

I will talk shit all I want on the Internet, in public, to whomever about whatever.

Someone's comes up on me like that for something I fucking SAID, they'll go to jail and I will own their paycheck for a while. Come back again, you'll get the same thing. Hell, I'll even provoke you to do something really bad, and you go bah-bye!

Fucking losers.

Gurl....You sound suicidal. You cant get a paycheck after somebody beats your ass until you stop breathing and you become maggot food. Not everybody has the same limits. Sometimes folks just snap and wont hesitate to scrub a bitch out ......so when shit talking on the web, one should be careful...they might get in over their heads.

XxAxX said:

in my opinion, this is some massively childish shit. just sad.

people who overreact to internet comments take themselves way too seriously.

if you ever feel that someone on the internet has said something you personally think is despicable, remember the rule of free speech.

remember that other people are entitled to not only have opinions, but to express them, even when their words contradict your personal opinion.

AND IN CASE YOU HAVE MISSED MY MEANING HERE

when you escalate a situation that begins with a comment on the internet, when you take it real and launch an attack against another person in real life (be it fist fights, stalking, breaking and entering, etc.) arising from your perception of their internet posts:

YOU ARE CROSSING THE LINE.

YOUR CONDUCT IS NO LONGER MORALLY JUSTIFIABLE.

YOU HAVE BECOME WORSE THAN THAT WHICH YOU FOUGHT AGAINST.

YOUR CONDUCT IS NO LONGER SANE.

you have no basis for pride, at that point

Let us also not forget that laws are continuously being developed against internet shit talkers....people cannot just write whatever they want.....might end up sued.

paintedlady said:

GetAwayFromMe said:

Believe it.

Actually....

it depends on what is said... if you say something that someone can sue you for, defamation, discrimaination, etc. you will pay the price for saying dumb shit online that. People lose their jobs over just that. Heck, I even know orgers changed their handle names for instance because they were AFRAID of legal actions made against them.

I am sure you know.

Oooooh spill the beans & rice.

paintedlady said:

KatSkrizzle said:

Ohhhh EMMMM GEEEEE!!!!!!

He's a punk to go slap up a teenager. What a sorry excuse of a man, he needs NOT to have any kids!

[Edited 12/12/10 15:58pm]

ole boy should be slapped just for those little ass braids he was wearing

StillGotIt said:

XxAxX said:

in my opinion, this is some massively childish shit. just sad.

people who overreact to internet comments take themselves way too seriously.

if you ever feel that someone on the internet has said something you personally think is despicable, remember the rule of free speech.

remember that other people are entitled to not only have opinions, but to express them, even when their words contradict your personal opinion.

AND IN CASE YOU HAVE MISSED MY MEANING HERE

when you escalate a situation that begins with a comment on the internet, when you take it real and launch an attack against another person in real life (be it fist fights, stalking, breaking and entering, etc.) arising from your perception of their internet posts:

YOU ARE CROSSING THE LINE.

YOUR CONDUCT IS NO LONGER MORALLY JUSTIFIABLE.

YOU HAVE BECOME WORSE THAN THAT WHICH YOU FOUGHT AGAINST.

YOUR CONDUCT IS NO LONGER SANE.

you have no basis for pride, at that point

Let us also not forget that laws are continuously being developed against internet shit talkers....people cannot just write whatever they want.....might end up sued.

who forgot this? not me! i work for the guy who authored some of minnesota's anti-stalking legislation at the supreme court level here in MN.

suing is a more reasonable solution that harassing, stalking, vilifying and beating someone down. adults should consider a lawsuit long before taking matters into their own hands

let's review what we know about free speech. it seems that quite a few people here are unclear on what this means, UNDER LAW.

the law permits freedom of speech, up to and including MY saying things that YOU may not like to hear.

(yes, even when you are an arrogant, wealthy, wacky celebrity).

how far will the law permit freedom of speech? to what degree are individuals allowed to voice their opinions, when it is clear that their opinions offend everyone around them??

check this out, good people of the ORG. some of you would condemn someone who 'talks' shit' who 'says something and starts something'. you feel that this behavior simply invites a counterattack.

yet, the supreme court, here in the USA, still has not made up its mind on HOW to address the anti-gay protestors who showed up at Matthew Snyder's funeral and chanted, shouted, picketed hateful things against his sexual orientation.

can you even think of anything more vile? and YET, this IS PROTECTED SPEECH UNDER THE LAW. at least for now.

THIS is what freedom of speech means, so, if you think you have the right to tell me that i cannot give voice to an opinion that is different from yours because you dislike what i have to say - think again. if you feel that what i have said pisses you off so badly that you just need to shoot me down, in person, think again.

the law is not on your side.

common sense is not on your side.

thank you that is all

http://www.csmonitor.com/...y-funerals

The US Supreme Court is set to hear a high-stakes battle over free speech on Wednesday in an appeal filed by the father of a US Marine killed in Iraq who claims his son’s funeral in 2006 was disrupted and ruined by an antigay protest.

Albert Snyder had won a $5 million jury verdict against the Rev. Fred Phelps and members of his Westboro Baptist Church for intentional infliction of emotional distress and violating the sanctity of the funeral of his son, Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder. But the judgment was later reversed by a federal appeals court panel that ruled that despite the offensive nature of the protests conducted by the Westboro members, their activities were protected by the First Amendment.

Mr. Phelps is well-known nationally for his fire-and-brimstone opposition to homosexuality. Since 2005, he and members of his Topeka, Kansas-based church have organized protests at military funerals of service members who are not gay in an effort to attract public attention to their cause.

The group believes that God hates homosexuality and is punishing America for its growing acceptance of gay rights by killing US troops overseas.

Family members and others at military funerals have complained about the protests. But Phelps and his supporters insist they have a constitutional right to carry their message to the people at the funerals.

“Snyder had one (and only one) opportunity to bury his son and that occasion has been tarnished forever,” wrote Mr. Snyder’s lawyer, Sean Summers of York, Pa., in his petition urging the high court to take up the case. “Snyder deserved better. Matthew deserved better. A civilized society deserved better.”

The appeals court that reversed the jury verdict did not disagree with that point. But the appeals court said despite the “distasteful and repugnant nature of the words being challenged,” Phelps had a First Amendment right to speak on public issues, even when the speech was highly offensive.

The panel quoted a fellow appeals court judge: “Judges defending the Constitution must sometimes share [their] foxhole with scoundrels of every sort, but to abandon the post because of the poor company is to sell freedom cheaply.”

The opinion continues: “It is a fair summary of history to say that the safeguards of liberty have often been forged in controversies involving not very nice people.”

Phelps’s lawyer, his daughter Margie Phelps of Topeka, said that contrary to claims by opposing counsel, the Westboro protesters did not disrupt the funeral service.

The seven picketers stood in a place designated by a priest and by the police, over a thousand feet from the funeral, she said. They sang songs and waved signs that included the messages: “You’re Going to Hell,” and “Thank God for Dead Soldiers.” The demonstration was neither visible nor audible to those attending the funeral, she said.

“No one going to the funeral saw them, including [Mr. Snyder],” Ms. Phelps writes. Snyder “did not hear them; and, they were gone when he left the church.”

Margie Phelps says Snyder’s objections to the protest were prompted by news footage he viewed after the event and by written material he viewed on the Internet a month after the service.

Westboro’s lawyer said Snyder’s lawsuit violates the free speech protections of the First Amendment because the church members were engaged in public speech that has not been proven false.

“The Constitution is imperiled if a subjective claim of outrage can be used to penalize into silence speech that does not make false statements of fact, uttered in public arenas on public issues,” Margie Phelps writes.

In asking the Supreme Court to overturn the appeals court decision, Snyder’s lawyer says the high court has never granted categorical protection to the type of speech at issue in the case.

Mr. Summers says his client is a private individual who had done nothing to hold himself up as part of a public event or controversy. “There is no reason for the court to extend absolute protection to expressive conduct that intentionally harms that individual,” he says.

“Mr. Snyder had a substantial privacy interest in attending his son’s funeral without unwanted interference,” he writes. “The Phelpses’ conduct during Matthew Snyder’s funeral caused Mr. Snyder serious emotional and physical hardship and hindered his grieving process.”

Summers adds in his brief: “The Phelpses’ freedom of speech should have ended where it conflicted with Mr. Snyder’s freedom to participate in his son’s funeral, which was intended to be a solemn religious gathering.”

uPtoWnNY said:

Graycap23 said:

Amazing isn't?

Just look at all the racist, sexist, homophobic remarks at YouTube, imdb, Facebook and newspaper websites. The internet has these punkass bitches thinking they rough.

i should add, in all seriousness*, there is ONE offense which definitely, uneQUIVocally, beyond question and ANY shadow of a doubt, does merit personal retaliation in the form of harassment and stalking, home invasion, etc.

and this horrible, unforGIVable, offensive and craptastic act would be what?

anyone?

an unfavorable book review :- |

*

This reminds me of what I once said to someone that when I was 5 and they were an adult, that at that time they should have known better than me being that I was only 5. An adult should know better than a teenager what is right and what is wrong!

K', this situation was recalled to my mind while I'm here babysitting, and remember that I am the adult. It's tough when they are trying to get away with stuff and talk back (these kids aren't that bad though they're actually good kids) but still, gotta remember that.

paintedlady said:

GetAwayFromMe said:

Believe it.

Actually....

it depends on what is said... if you say something that someone can sue you for, defamation, discrimaination, etc. you will pay the price for saying dumb shit online that. People lose their jobs over just that. Heck, I even know orgers changed their handle names for instance because they were AFRAID of legal actions made against them.

I am sure you know.

:FALLOFF:

You know, it's really pretty simple. Don't say some shit that you aren't prepared to back up. What does the internet have to do with anything? What, you can say whatever you want because you can hide behind the anonymity of a computer screen? Bullshit. That's everything that's wrong with the internet. How quickly people have forgotten what the world used to be like.

Cerebus said:

You know, it's really pretty simple. Don't say some shit that you aren't prepared to back up. What does the internet have to do with anything? What, you can say whatever you want because you can hide behind the anonymity of a computer screen? Bullshit. That's everything that's wrong with the internet. How quickly people have forgotten what the world used to be like.

The timid little mice who you wouldn't hear a peep out of surely didn't Some of the so-called "bullies" in this VERY site are dropping reminders after reminders that this medium is the only way they could over-compensate for not being able to speak in the same manner to another person, face to face.

That being said, its some sad shit.

uPtoWnNY said:

Graycap23 said:

Amazing isn't?

Just look at all the racist, sexist, homophobic remarks at YouTube, imdb, Facebook and newspaper websites. The internet has these punkass bitches thinking they rough.

And lets not forget about cyberbullies. They're the biggest punkass bitches out there on the web.

Co-sign on the previous three posts.

Harlepolis said:

Cerebus said:

You know, it's really pretty simple. Don't say some shit that you aren't prepared to back up. What does the internet have to do with anything? What, you can say whatever you want because you can hide behind the anonymity of a computer screen? Bullshit. That's everything that's wrong with the internet. How quickly people have forgotten what the world used to be like.

The timid little mice who you wouldn't hear a peep out of surely didn't Some of the so-called "bullies" in this VERY site are dropping reminders after reminders that this medium is the only way they could over-compensate for not being able to speak in the same manner to another person, face to face.

That being said, its some sad shit.

folks are preaching truth right now........and I hope the orgers who "need to know" are reading

StillGotIt said:

folks are preaching truth right now........and I hope the orgers who "need to know" are reading

banks said:

December 09, 2010. Y'all better watch what you say in these comments . . . Sometimes it can CATCH UP TO YOU . . . yikes!!!

http://www.worldstarhipho...8y3R1q4Sha

I meant to post about this earlier. Did that skinny dude look drunk to you? I don't think it was a fair fight. Dude was either smashed or blazed and you can't concentrate when you're under the influence.

p.s.

I hear some chick say "could you please get away from my car" and then I heard a scream when skinny got clocked.

plus