I must say, I think impersonating someone online to do them harm is a crime. I know he said "Hypothetically" about the things he was doing, but the man could prove harm via the mail he gets from his neighbors. He could show call logs and mailers from Scientology. It's not much different than how congress got involved with robocalls, people recognize these things as lowering quality of life because of the stress of having to deal with that type of nonsense.

Not to say the man who stole the package is blameless. He should be prosecuted for stealing a device that probably cost over $1,000. But what the glitter-bomb-maker did in retribution is - as he says, petty. I'd go on to say immature and irresponsible.

Yep, I totally agree.
Also, that's a lawsuit. You cannot put an attractive nuisance in your open yard designed to injure someone, even a thief. That's just a step away from a shotgun at your front door with a string on it's trigger attached to the doorknob. Sounds like a great idea to an idiot asshole, but it's totally illegal and murder if it works as designed.

@bobknight33, I hope that answers your question, but in the likely event you don't grasp it, one is petty theft/destruction of property (property with no monetary value) the other intentional assault with a weapon, and technically setting a trap is lying in wait which in many states could make the misdemeanor assault a class a felony.
You would like to pretend they're both crimes, so are equally as bad....fortunately the law isn't as short sighted, biased, and hyper tribal as you.

Short answer: yes. 100%.

Long answer:
Well, let's unpack this.

"the acts of a 17 yr old boy"
I did some dumb shit when I was a kid. Nothing major, but I certainly wasn't a choir boy. But this isn't some drunken hijinx. It isn't even some petty crime.

This is an accusation of violent sexual assault.

Now, even then, I'd be willing to grant that people can change. If he'd paid his due, apologised, and proved he had changed, I'd be willing to say that everyone deserves a shot at redemption.

But...
"no other history of repeat offense"
you mean apart from the other two women accusing him of sexual assault?

Finally...
"destroy a career"
Let's cut this bullshit right here. Your career is not "destroyed" if you don't get to sit on the supreme court. I'm a software developer. I'll never work for Google or Apple or Facebook or whatever, but career is doing fine, thanks.

It's the Supreme Court... it should literally be the elite of the elite in legal minds. If you've got two candidates who are identical in all respects except one got slightly better marks in high school, you take that one BECAUSE YOU CAN.

Kavanaugh is clearly not the best available. If nothing else, this process has shown that he is woefully unsuitable for this position. He has constantly lied, deflected and then become hysterical (and yes, I'm using that particular word very deliberately).

But what saddens about this whole thing (and it really shouldn't surprise me at this point) is the hypocrisy of the right. Because it's Trumps pick, they're all "it's just youthful exuberance" and "let bygones be bygones" where you know if the tables were turned and it was a democratic pick who had even a minor misdemeanour they would be screaming from the rooftops.

The funny thing is, I still think that Kavanaugh (whatever I may personally think of the slimy fuck-weasel) deserves the presumption of innocence. If he really was the guy he's made out to be by the right, he would have said "I'm innocent, but of course this should be investigated. I am terribly sorry for this woman. She has obviously been through a traumatic incident, but she has me confused for someone else." and then it would have been investigated, probably nothing would be found (due to the age of the claims and the difficulty of gathering evidence).

He could have handled this with humility, sympathy and dignity.

But he failed every possible test. He has shown himself utterly unfit to be on the supreme court, and quite frankly, he's shown himself to be a poor excuse for a human. Fuck him so very much.

You know the truism, "We dislike in others what we fear is in ourselves."

Lindsey Graham is a bigoted, small-minded, opportunistic, disingenuous, hateful, petty man.

It's no wonder you don't like him, @bobknight33

You can't possibly argue that the Pocahontas thing while at an event intending to honor Native Americans is acceptable behavior. If he thinks Warren is lying about her heritage, fine. Say she's lying about it some other time. Nobody put a gun to Trump's head and said he has to call her that. And on top of all that, at least have the courtesy to not do it at that event. Honoring World War II Native American veterans has jack shit nothing to do with Elizabeth Warren.

Even if you happen to think that there's nothing wrong with the Washington Redskins name, do you think it would be appropriate for the President of the United States to bust through the wall Kool Aid man style dressed head to toe in Redskins garb doing the Tomahawk Chop at an event intended to honor Native Americans? FFS!

What next? Meet with a Chinese delegation and walk in doing slant eyes and the ol' "Chinese, Japanese, dirty knees, *lift shirt* LOOK AT THESE!!!"

All he had to do was turn his "be a dick" switch off for a few hours to honor war veterans. Is that so hard? Apparently, it's impossible for him.

Watching this guy as President is just astounding to me. Every damn day seemingly he finds new ways to be a total dick when he completely doesn't have to be. Elizabeth Warren is going to be fine, I don't care he insulted her. But acting like an ass clown in a way that's very likely to offend actual war heroes in the process?! Zero justification, zero excuses.

Being President isn't supposed to be a 24/7 reality TV show where everything revolves around petty partisan/personal vendettas, including disregarding basic tenets of acting like a mature adult.

My favorite Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers song and video.

Very analogous to Westboro Baptist "church" stooges. They (ab)use their constitutionally protected rights to free speech to say the most offensive and provocative crap that they can come up with, specifically with the intention to incite a (violent) reaction against them. Why? Because pretty much the entire Phelps family are lawyers, and they know that they can generally win any assault case that they can provoke people into. All that hate they spew boils down to a stupid, petty moneymaking scam.

Is the Seattle Nazi that devious and cunning? I doubt it. Probably just a crazy / fucked up guy, as Maher said. That doesn't excuse his fuckwittery, but it does reinforce Maher's argument that punching the guy is NOT the best response.

Morello is awesome, with RATM and Audioslave, and now Prophets of Rage, etc. But he's dead wrong on this issue, and comes across as a bit of an "internet tough guy". Outside of just ignoring them, I kinda think the only way to one-up these people is to know the law, what constitutes assault etc., and essentially beat them at their own game (ie. provoke them into doing something to you). On the other hand, there's something to be said for using using passive-aggressive snark to mock / humiliate them in a nonviolent way, ala the Foo Fighters:

That was petty, vindictive and childish.

More of it, I say!

*quality
*doublepromote

Two points followed by some general discussion but w/e...

I didn't try to justify his actions in the slightest, he was wrong to draw the gun and to discharge it. I understand why someone might do something if he sees an idiot with the worlds worst flamethrower trying to set people on fire, but I do not condone it.

I also said that he was drawing the gun to defend others, didn't try to make out that he was being attacked personally. Defense of others is a legitimate reason to step in to a situation (even if, again, I think the amount of force he decided to deploy was way over the top and illegal...).

No, neither side should show up armed, that is how far this whole shit show has barreled down the hill. And yes, I would be fairly certain that a bunch of white supremacists would be armed, so if I did show up to protest against them, I sure as fuck wouldn't be attacking them first and giving them reasons to lose their head and draw down on me... They certainly are the types that gravitate to gun ownership, rebellion against the government etc, I don't think that's a huge surprise to anyone right?

One of the first rules about fighting I learned way back in the day when I worked security is that it's fucking stupid to launch violence against anyone that you do not explicitly need to because you have no idea what they can do, what they have access to etc. If you can resolve a situation with words rather than fists (or more), do so at every opportunity. The idiots showing up to 'punch nazis' really have no concept of this. They show up to 'take nazi scalps' and expect no repercussions?

And yeah, you clearly put this up as a 'left did something bad, OMG THE RIGHT DID SOMETHING WORSE', the entire screed describing the vid only mentions the pyro once as a minor note in a story about the evil armed racist. You're about as fair and balanced as Faux and it's bitchy little stunts like this shit which will always put you exactly where BK33 says you are.

Fucking amazing, you're moronic enough to make Bob right. Kudos...

But I still believe that it's more important for people to see what happened than to suppress it, so the vote stands (petty would be taking it away now you've insulted me ; ).

A few points.
First, that was more than two points. ;-)
Second, watch again. The first time he pulls the trigger, it's pointed head high into the crowd, but fortunately for everyone, he didn't have a round chambered. True, his second attempt didn't look like it was aimed at people.

Yes, people on both sides of this conflict came armed with pepper sprays, helmets, masks, and clubs. Only one side seemed to have guns, and they used them.

The guy who shot was far from being attacked, he approached gun drawn to have a confrontation, not to avoid one.
Side note, I hope they arrested the fucker with the spray can too. I don't justify unjustifiable actions...ends don't justify means.

So, the antifa should have shown up with guns? Or are you saying the right is SO dangerous you should expect to be shot if you protest Nazis? What is your point?

Clearly, you are a petty cunt, hence the petty comment. If this was a commentary opinion piece excusing the flamethrower, like that other video, I wouldn't expect any upvotes.

Two points.

Completely unreasonable to discharge a firearm in to a crowd like that, although I'm fairly sure that guy is drilled enough that he could accurately shoot someone at that range if he really wanted to. The guy has been charged, correct? Entirely appropriate.

Second, you notice the missiles incoming, the dickhead trying to turn a spray can in to a flamethrower? Do you honestly think these were isolated events? Do you not think that people prepared for this? Or does every person carry aerosols and lighters just for shits and giggles?

The pretext of antifa is that assaulting people is fine because it's proactive self defense, right? If it's okay to physically attack people for thinking and saying offensive things, then why the fuck is anyone complaining about someone drawing a weapon to defend others against an actual attack??? /grin

That's the problem when you justify unreasonable actions on one side, whether you like it or not you justify unreasonable actions for everyone.

And just to ice the cake, if you're dumb enough to show up with sticks/stones/cans of spray against the the white right who are well known to be armed to the motherfucking teeth, you might want to avoid poking the bear.

ps. Upvoted your vid because it should be seen (the more documentation about the whole shebang the better) and because I'm not a petty cunt... X D

You are talking about the cops right?
Why can't they just act normal and not try to create a situation.. just be polite. Cops that act all awkward and demand fear because they want to flex their rights in petty situations like this are just creating a headache for all involved. Save this shit for when it matters.

ugh, why not just act normal and not try to create a situation... just be polite. People that act all awkward and refuse to speak because they want to flex their rights in petty situations like this are just creating a headache for all involved. Save this shit for when it matters.

Idiots, the thief and the construction workers.

-Jumping onto of a moving vehicle
-Punching the windscreen(not possible to break with your hand).
-Holding on the car as it continues to gain serious speed
-RAMMING SAID VEHICLE (causing $$$$ damage to your own car)while your colleague is still hanging onto the front.

For what? a $200 bit of machinery? Not even worth the damage you'd do to your hand from punching the windscreen (considering you're a construction worker and your income relies on working hands!) let alone the potential brain damage, disability or death if you come off the bonnet.

I'm also not sure how the law would interpret ramming a car off the road, or flipping it, or squishing it against other cars and causing more collateral than the tool is worth (which you'd have to do to make it stop), just to stop a petty thief. And honestly if you damaged my car to stop a thief, you'd be paying for my car.

Do these people think they are living in an action movie? I know the Terminator jumped onto a car and punched through the windscreen, but they used a hydraulic ram and hid it with special fx.

Idiots.

Would love to see how this ends though cause I'd be very surprised if everything /everyone was fine.