Doughboy, Michael Moore's bodyguard gets caught packing heat

[Hammer]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: isekii

Originally posted by: Nitemare
Bowling for Hypocrisy


NSFW or home

I hate that fat sack of sh!t

You just insulted sh!t. That's an impressive feat!

hahahaha. its true though. 😀

 

[Looney]

WTF? Hypocrisy? It was his bodyguard, not him.

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: Hardcore
WTF? Hypocrisy? It was his bodyguard, not him.

Sometimes extreme hatred override rationality

 

[Red Dawn]

It's to protect him from the Dumbfukistanis

 

[DnetMHZ]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

NSFW or home

MOMMY MAKE THE BAD MAN STOP!!!!

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Hardcore
WTF? Hypocrisy? It was his bodyguard, not him.

Sometimes extreme hatred override rationality

Hardly. According to the liberal anti-gunners example, only the rich and famous deserve armed protection. The poor are fscked.

When an anti-gun advocate hires armed protection, it is the height of hypocrisy. They should have the courage of their convictions and resolve themselves to being as defenseless as those they would impose their will upon.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

NSFW or home

He is not a good looking man

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: isekii

Originally posted by: Nitemare
Bowling for Hypocrisy


NSFW or home

I hate that fat sack of sh!t

:thumbsup:

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Hardcore
WTF? Hypocrisy? It was his bodyguard, not him.

Sometimes extreme hatred override rationality

Hardly. According to the liberal anti-gunners example, only the rich and famous deserve armed protection. The poor are fscked.

When an anti-gun advocate hires armed protection, it is the height of hypocrisy. They should have the courage of their convictions and resolve themselves to being as defenseless as those they would impose their will upon.

The problem is, you go beyond the facts surrounding the article in an attempt to defame this person, in what can only be explained as some pretty deep hatred.

1. The article does not indicate Moore was currently with this bodyguard at the time of arrest

More importantly:

2. There is no idnication whatsoever that Moore knew his bodyguard is carrying a gun, nor is there any indication Moore wants him to carry a gun.

So based purely on the facts currently available, how can you go about convicting Mr. Moore of this alleged "hypocrisy"?.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Hardcore
WTF? Hypocrisy? It was his bodyguard, not him.

Sometimes extreme hatred override rationality

yeah apparently so

1) it's his body guard - probably a good idea for someone in that profession to be legally armed.
1.1) no mention of moore being present
2) he's not against guns - it helps watching the movie to know what you're talking about. It was more againts NRA than anything else.
3) faux new...nuff said

 

[DBL]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Hardcore
WTF? Hypocrisy? It was his bodyguard, not him.

Sometimes extreme hatred override rationality

Hardly. According to the liberal anti-gunners example, only the rich and famous deserve armed protection. The poor are fscked.

When an anti-gun advocate hires armed protection, it is the height of hypocrisy. They should have the courage of their convictions and resolve themselves to being as defenseless as those they would impose their will upon.

While I'm certainly no huge MM fan, I have to wonder how many of you actually watched the movie or understood its message. If I remember correctly, MM admits to owning firearms in the movie. The overriding message throughout the movie is that a society so engrossed in fear-mongering coupled w/ the enormous supply of easily attainable legal firearms is a bad mix.

 

[Hammer]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
It's to protect him from the Dumbfukistanis

you're still using the same tired jokes?

kerry lost. get over it.

 

[tweakmm]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Hardcore
WTF? Hypocrisy? It was his bodyguard, not him.

Sometimes extreme hatred override rationality

Hardly. According to the liberal anti-gunners example, only the rich and famous deserve armed protection. The poor are fscked.

When an anti-gun advocate hires armed protection, it is the height of hypocrisy. They should have the courage of their convictions and resolve themselves to being as defenseless as those they would impose their will upon.

Yes and no. In Bowling for Columbine he makes a very good point that we are a gun crazed culture and that the average person has no need for a gun. The difference is that Michael Moore has the whole of the crazed right-wing gun brandishing redneck nutjobs out for his blood and the chance of an attack is much greater for him than the average person in our society.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Hardcore
WTF? Hypocrisy? It was his bodyguard, not him.

Sometimes extreme hatred override rationality

Hardly. According to the liberal anti-gunners example, only the rich and famous deserve armed protection. The poor are fscked.

When an anti-gun advocate hires armed protection, it is the height of hypocrisy. They should have the courage of their convictions and resolve themselves to being as defenseless as those they would impose their will upon.

The problem is, you go beyond the facts surrounding the article in an attempt to defame this person, in what can only be explained as some pretty deep hatred.

1. The article does not indicate Moore was currently with this bodyguard at the time of arrest

More importantly:

2. There is no idnication whatsoever that Moore knew his bodyguard is carrying a gun, nor is there any indication Moore wants him to carry a gun.

So based purely on the facts currently available, how can you go about convicting Mr. Moore of this alleged "hypocrisy"?.

A real stretch there. Let's look at this logically, shall we?

The bodyguard has a license to carry in a state where only professionals can acquire one. (CA) Therefore, he is, by trade, and armed bodyguard. That leaves little doubt that Moore knowingly and willing hired armed protection.

At any rate, your argument is weak.

Any anti-gun advocate who hires armed protection is hypocritical.

 

[DBL]

Originally posted by: Amused
A real stretch there. Let's look at this logically, shall we?

The bodyguard has a license to carry in a state where only professionals can acquire one. (CA) Therefore, he is, by trade, and armed bodyguard. That leaves little doubt that Moore knowingly and willing hired armed protection.

At any rate, your argument is weak.

Any anti-gun advocate who hires armed protection is hypocritical.

Someone never saw the movie.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: tweakmm

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Hardcore
WTF? Hypocrisy? It was his bodyguard, not him.

Sometimes extreme hatred override rationality

Hardly. According to the liberal anti-gunners example, only the rich and famous deserve armed protection. The poor are fscked.

When an anti-gun advocate hires armed protection, it is the height of hypocrisy. They should have the courage of their convictions and resolve themselves to being as defenseless as those they would impose their will upon.

Yes and no. In Bowling for Columbine he makes a very good point that we are a gun crazed culture and that the average person has no need for a gun. The difference is that Michael Moore has the whole of the crazed right-wing gun brandishing redneck nutjobs out for his blood and the chance of an attack is much greater for him than the average person in our society.

So only the elite who speak out against guns may have use of private guns?

Sorry, there is no "no" to his hypocrisy. If he feels he deserves armed protection and the average person does not, that is elitist hypocrisy.

And, may I ask, when was the last time an anti-gun person was shot by a pro-gun advocate?

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: DBL

Originally posted by: Amused
A real stretch there. Let's look at this logically, shall we?

The bodyguard has a license to carry in a state where only professionals can acquire one. (CA) Therefore, he is, by trade, and armed bodyguard. That leaves little doubt that Moore knowingly and willing hired armed protection.

At any rate, your argument is weak.

Any anti-gun advocate who hires armed protection is hypocritical.

Someone never saw the movie.

The movie is irrelevant. Moore has made his position clear with his politics. He is anti-gun.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Hammer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
It's to protect him from the Dumbfukistanis

you're still using the same tired jokes?

kerry lost. get over it.

What you think I was talking about you? I don't think you'd harm Moore thus you aren't a Dumfukistani. Those who say he should be shot of kicked out of the country are whom I consider Dumbfukistanis.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: lozina

Originally posted by: Hardcore
WTF? Hypocrisy? It was his bodyguard, not him.

Sometimes extreme hatred override rationality

 

[Hammer]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Hammer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
It's to protect him from the Dumbfukistanis

you're still using the same tired jokes?

kerry lost. get over it.

What you think I was talking about you? I don't think you'd harm Moore thus you aren't a Dumfukistani. Those who say he should be shot of kicked out of the country are whom I consider Dumbfukistanis.

i've seen you refer to texas as dumbfukistan on more than one occasion.

 

[K1052]

Maybe he took Clint a little too seriously.

😀

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Hammer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Hammer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
It's to protect him from the Dumbfukistanis

you're still using the same tired jokes?

kerry lost. get over it.

What you think I was talking about you? I don't think you'd harm Moore thus you aren't a Dumfukistani. Those who say he should be shot of kicked out of the country are whom I consider Dumbfukistanis.

i've seen you refer to texas as dumbfukistan on more than one occasion.

Uh Oh, the eyes of Texas are upon me!:shocked:

 

[Kev]

Originally posted by: Longkid

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Fox News, nuff said.

Are you saying he DIDN'T illegally possess a gun?

He's saying FOX is notoriously bias to the republican party. Besides, who cares? I mean really, its not like he tried to sneak it past security. He should have know better but I?m sure he wasn?t hired for his mental capacity. He is a bodyguard, not so effective without the threat of force. Of course it begs the question why MM has a body guard with him instead of a personal trainer.

It doesn't even say he was with Moore, it just says "employed by Moore." Fox News is absolute garbage.

 

[Hammer]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Hammer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Hammer

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
It's to protect him from the Dumbfukistanis

you're still using the same tired jokes?

kerry lost. get over it.

What you think I was talking about you? I don't think you'd harm Moore thus you aren't a Dumfukistani. Those who say he should be shot of kicked out of the country are whom I consider Dumbfukistanis.

i've seen you refer to texas as dumbfukistan on more than one occasion.

Uh Oh, the eyes of Texas are upon me!:shocked:

it's in poor taste and classless.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Kev

Originally posted by: Longkid

Originally posted by: Howard

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Fox News, nuff said.

Are you saying he DIDN'T illegally possess a gun?

He's saying FOX is notoriously bias to the republican party. Besides, who cares? I mean really, its not like he tried to sneak it past security. He should have know better but I?m sure he wasn?t hired for his mental capacity. He is a bodyguard, not so effective without the threat of force. Of course it begs the question why MM has a body guard with him instead of a personal trainer.

It doesn't even say he was with Moore, it just says "employed by Moore." Fox News is absolute garbage.

So you think he takes it off when he's with the person he is paid to protect and puts it back on when not working?