Get the word out if you know this jerk.

[shocksyde]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Stop crying. You fools are getting all emotional over a cat getting teased. This isn't a video of a nice little grandma getting beat to death while making oatmeal cookies, we're talking about a video of a cat getting teased.

And to think that some people cried looking at this video. They'd have to be an emotional trainwreck to get that upset about this.

You are one heartless bastard. I don't give a shit how smart you think you are, how right you think you are, or how absurd you think we are. You are a piece of shit and I hope a giant 100ft cat throws your bitchass against a wall, smacks you around, and then gives you a nice shower.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Coupled with the fact that you're unaware of the link between animal abusers and serial murders, and one really must wonder why the rest of us are even giving you the time of day.

First you criticize me for having poor reading comprehension, then you prove that you either have poor reading comprehension or you just didn't read the thread.

This has been covered quite clearly. Nowhere in the thread did I deny a link between animal abusers and serial murders. I merely (and correctly) pointed out that just because most serial killers have a history of torturing animals, this does NOT mean that most people that have a history of torturing animals become serial killers.

This is not a difficult concept to understand. Are you seriously trying to claim otherwise?

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

I'm willing to bet you that he doesn't get convicted on a felony charge.

From a self proclaimed "intellectual", that is not a "rational" assessment if you watched the video of clearcut Cruelty to Animals via Oklahoma law as I quoted above. Hence my original assessment of your rationalization skills equating to "Fcking Idiot" status. Have a nice day.

I think you're overlooking a critical detail.

You clearly pointed out a law which applies to adults. This kid is in high school and is a minor. Hence I don't think he'll get convicted on a felony charge.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: shocksyde

You are one heartless bastard. I don't give a shit how smart you think you are, how right you think you are, or how absurd you think we are. You are a piece of shit and I hope a giant 100ft cat throws your bitchass against a wall, smacks you around, and then gives you a nice shower.

This is the kind of emotionally charged nonsense that I'm against. Posts like this are why I think so many people have a hard time thinking rationally and get caught up in emotion.

I think you're missing a few screws in your head, and you're missing a few details.

1. I am not the one in the video.
2. I do not own a cat.
3. I do not torture animals.
4. I do not condone people torturing cats.
5. There aren't 100 ft cats.

 

[shocksyde]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

1. I am a silly little bitch.
2. I am a cat.
3. I do not torture circus clowns.
4. I do not condone people eating peanut butter in this time of salmonella crisis.
5. There aren't 100 ft cats, but I've seen a 95 ft one. He was fuzzy and smelled of elderberries.

What odd things to say...

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
I think you're overlooking a critical detail.

You clearly pointed out a law which applies to adults. This kid is in high school and is a minor.

It depends on state, but AFAIK animal cruelity is not age limited. Instead of prison though the kid may be house arrest or juvie. It'd probably be in his best interests to be where he is supervised at least until the mob violence phase blows over.

http://asci.uvm.edu/equine/law/cruelty/ok_cruel.htm

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: shocksyde

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

1. I am a silly little bitch.
2. I am a cat.
3. I do not torture circus clowns.
4. I do not condone people eating peanut butter in this time of salmonella crisis.
5. There aren't 100 ft cats, but I've seen a 95 ft one. He was fuzzy and smelled of elderberries.

What odd things to say...

That was actually pretty creative and funny.:thumbsup:

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: shocksyde

You are one heartless bastard. I don't give a shit how smart you think you are, how right you think you are, or how absurd you think we are. You are a piece of shit and I hope a giant 100ft cat throws your bitchass against a wall, smacks you around, and then gives you a nice shower.

This is the kind of emotionally charged nonsense that I'm against. Posts like this are why I think so many people have a hard time thinking rationally and get caught up in emotion.

I think you're missing a few screws in your head, and you're missing a few details.

1. I am not the one in the video.
2. I do not own a cat.
3. I do not torture animals.
4. I do not condone people torturing cats.
5. There aren't 100 ft cats.

so those that show child porn are not guilty to you then since they have not been found guilty in a court of law?

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Coupled with the fact that you're unaware of the link between animal abusers and serial murders, and one really must wonder why the rest of us are even giving you the time of day.

First you criticize me for having poor reading comprehension, then you prove that you either have poor reading comprehension or you just didn't read the thread.

This has been covered quite clearly. Nowhere in the thread did I deny a link between animal abusers and serial murders. I merely (and correctly) pointed out that just because most serial killers have a history of torturing animals, this does NOT mean that most people that have a history of torturing animals become serial killers.

This is not a difficult concept to understand. Are you seriously trying to claim otherwise?

Maybe if you weren't so deflective, obtuse, and indirect, you wouldn't be so misunderstood. Bonus points for not putting words in people's mouths, altering their posts when quoting because you're desperate, etc.

Back to my point:

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Also, it's an absurd stretch to think that just because a kid made a video of him scaring a cat that he's going to be murdering people.

You see, son, it's not an absurd stretch. The link between the two is well established and undisputed. You interpreted jpeyton's post as implying a 1-to-1 relationship. Maybe that was his intent, maybe it was not. What's absurd is you zeroing in on that and picking a fight. You were splitting hairs after making an assumption and you were called on it. Deal with it and move on.

If you were half as intelligent as you've convinced yourself you are, you'd recognize when it's time to throw in the towel. If nothing else, this has become quite tired and boring.

 

[shocksyde]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: shocksyde

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

1. I am a silly little bitch.
2. I am a cat.
3. I do not torture circus clowns.
4. I do not condone people eating peanut butter in this time of salmonella crisis.
5. There aren't 100 ft cats, but I've seen a 95 ft one. He was fuzzy and smelled of elderberries.

What odd things to say...

That was actually pretty creative and funny.:thumbsup:

I think I just *snorgled* in my coffee.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Coupled with the fact that you're unaware of the link between animal abusers and serial murders, and one really must wonder why the rest of us are even giving you the time of day.

First you criticize me for having poor reading comprehension, then you prove that you either have poor reading comprehension or you just didn't read the thread.

This has been covered quite clearly. Nowhere in the thread did I deny a link between animal abusers and serial murders. I merely (and correctly) pointed out that just because most serial killers have a history of torturing animals, this does NOT mean that most people that have a history of torturing animals become serial killers.

This is not a difficult concept to understand. Are you seriously trying to claim otherwise?

Maybe if you weren't so deflective, obtuse, and indirect, you wouldn't be so misunderstood. Bonus points for not putting words in people's mouths, altering their posts when quoting because you're desperate, etc.

Back to my point:

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Also, it's an absurd stretch to think that just because a kid made a video of him scaring a cat that he's going to be murdering people.

You see, son, it's not an absurd stretch. The link between the two is well established and undisputed. You interpreted jpeyton's post as implying a 1-to-1 relationship. Maybe that was his intent, maybe it was not. What's absurd is you zeroing in on that and picking a fight. You were splitting hairs after making an assumption and you were called on it. Deal with it and move on.

If you were half as intelligent as you've convinced yourself you are, you'd recognize when it's time to throw in the towel. If nothing else, this has become quite tired and boring.

There are many cases of animal cruelty, but hardly any (relatively speaking) cases of mass murderers. Sure, the mass murders get a lot of airtime on the news, but they are generally rare cases.

While you can point out that most mass murderers began their careers of murdering people by torturing animals, this does NOT mean that most people who torture animals become mass murderers.

I clearly pointed this out before.

I understand that due to your primitive thought process you feel the need to create a strawman argument and claim that I said that there was no link, but unfortunately for you this is never what I said.

It's up to you to understand this, I cannot help you.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: xboxist

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: alkemyst

I think in an attempt to be an eBadAss, the point went way over 91TTZ's head. You never said the holocaust didn't happen or it was a lesser event.

Wow, you completely didn't comprehend what I said to him. Leave the arguing up to the intellectuals, ok?

BTW, aren't you the idiot who admitted doing jail time before?

I see that you are a fan of ad hominem arguments. Next time that you are trying oh-so-hard to make a "rational" argument, perhaps you should leave the logical fallacies at the door? It is hard to think of you as an intellectual otherwise.

Stop crying. You fools are getting all emotional over a cat getting teased. This isn't a video of a nice little grandma getting beat to death while making oatmeal cookies, we're talking about a video of a cat getting teased.

And to think that some people cried looking at this video. They'd have to be an emotional trainwreck to get that upset about this.

You're an absolute douchebag.

It's nice of you to jump into a thread with an insult.

Your sarcasm does nothing to advance your position.
There is no difference, except in scale, between that grandmother you pulled oput of your ass, and a very real abused cat in the video.
THIS is the distinction you do not know, can not admit to, will not or may not ever understand.

 

[91TTZ]

No wonder people on this forum hate lawyers. They simply cannot understand how you can defend someone or demand that the facts are presented accurately if the accused is guilty of wrongdoing. They find it difficult separating reason from emotion.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: AlienCraft

There is no difference, except in scale, between that grandmother you pulled out of your ass, and a very real abused cat in the video.
THIS is the distinction you do not know, can not admit to, will not or may not ever understand.

So there is no difference between a human that is (hypothetically) murdered and a cat that is abused? Are you honestly claiming that?

You think torturing/killing animals is just as serious as torturing/killing people?

 

[shocksyde]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
No wonder people on this forum hate lawyers. They simply cannot understand how you can defend someone or demand that the facts are presented accurately if the accused is guilty of wrongdoing. They find it difficult separating reason from emotion.

Newsflash: Only lawyers like lawyers.

 

[ShotgunSteven]

Originally posted by: shocksyde

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
No wonder people on this forum hate lawyers. They simply cannot understand how you can defend someone or demand that the facts are presented accurately if the accused is guilty of wrongdoing. They find it difficult separating reason from emotion.

Newsflash: Only lawyers like lawyers.

So do snakes. Professional courtesy and all that.

Or was that sharks?

 

[shocksyde]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: AlienCraft

There is no difference, except in scale, between that grandmother you pulled out of your ass, and a very real abused cat in the video.
THIS is the distinction you do not know, can not admit to, will not or may not ever understand.

So there is no difference between a human that is (hypothetically) murdered and a cat that is abused? Are you honestly claiming that?

You think torturing/killing animals is just as serious as torturing/killing people?

I honestly think so. Both show mental issues.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Coupled with the fact that you're unaware of the link between animal abusers and serial murders, and one really must wonder why the rest of us are even giving you the time of day.

First you criticize me for having poor reading comprehension, then you prove that you either have poor reading comprehension or you just didn't read the thread.

This has been covered quite clearly. Nowhere in the thread did I deny a link between animal abusers and serial murders. I merely (and correctly) pointed out that just because most serial killers have a history of torturing animals, this does NOT mean that most people that have a history of torturing animals become serial killers.

This is not a difficult concept to understand. Are you seriously trying to claim otherwise?

Maybe if you weren't so deflective, obtuse, and indirect, you wouldn't be so misunderstood. Bonus points for not putting words in people's mouths, altering their posts when quoting because you're desperate, etc.

Back to my point:

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Also, it's an absurd stretch to think that just because a kid made a video of him scaring a cat that he's going to be murdering people.

You see, son, it's not an absurd stretch. The link between the two is well established and undisputed. You interpreted jpeyton's post as implying a 1-to-1 relationship. Maybe that was his intent, maybe it was not. What's absurd is you zeroing in on that and picking a fight. You were splitting hairs after making an assumption and you were called on it. Deal with it and move on.

If you were half as intelligent as you've convinced yourself you are, you'd recognize when it's time to throw in the towel. If nothing else, this has become quite tired and boring.

There are many cases of animal cruelty, but hardly any (relatively speaking) cases of mass murderers. Sure, the mass murders get a lot of airtime on the news, but they are generally rare cases.

While you can point out that most mass murderers began their careers of murdering people by torturing animals, this does NOT mean that most people who torture animals become mass murderers.

I clearly pointed this out before.

I understand that due to your primitive thought process you feel the need to create a strawman argument and claim that I said that there was no link, but unfortunately for you this is never what I said.

It's up to you to understand this, I cannot help you.

You picked a stupid fight because of an assumption on your part and your desire to split hairs so you could shoehorn your argument into reality. Fail. Likewise, after your troll posts and lame post modifications, you are the last person around here who should be crying over strawmen.

If you put as much effort into your analysis as you do trying convince yourself you're an "intellectual", we'd be able to take you more seriously and you wouldn't be so "misunderstood".

I'm going to end with this and leave the remaining slim pickins' of flesh on your bone for the next wave of pirhanna: "innocent until proven guilty" is the domain of the legal system. A jury's conviction or lack thereof is of little correlation to a person's true guilt. You saw the video. You saw a masked man slam a cat's head against a floor repeatedly, then against a wall repeatedly, being smacked, punched, and sprayed. All while desperately trying to get away. This is irrefutable. Furthermore, as others have stated, that kind of submissiveness in a cat is extremely out of the ordinary and is indicative of a history of abuse. Failure to recognize or acknowledge this on your part only contributes to our conviction that you lack basic analytical and reasoning abilities, contrary to what you keep trying to sell us. Trying to deny what we can all see eradicates your credibility, so efforts to continue to try to operate under that credibility is quite futile on your part.

So continue to keep posing as an "intellectual". The frustration with you ceased some time ago and has since progressed to sadness with a side of mild amusement. By all means, continue.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: AlienCraft

There is no difference, except in scale, between that grandmother you pulled out of your ass, and a very real abused cat in the video.
THIS is the distinction you do not know, can not admit to, will not or may not ever understand.

So there is no difference between a human that is (hypothetically) murdered and a cat that is abused? Are you honestly claiming that?

You think torturing/killing animals is just as serious as torturing/killing people?

The question should be "Why don't you see that 'torturing/killing animals is just as serious as torturing/killing people'? Cruelty is cruelty, no differernce which end of the cruelty pool you swim in.
I stated as such to avoid misunderstanding.

 

[91TTZ]

To appease the audience here, allow me to present a new reply to this video:

This is horrible!

This punk deserves to go to prison for 20 years minimum. Period! If I had a rubber hose I?d beat him with it. Then me, Amused, Alkemyst, and shocksyde?s 100 foot cat would roll up on this little Hitler and take turns beating the crap out of him.

I hope this Oklahoma hick has a tornado suck him up and drop him off in Oz, where a gang of angry cat-loving Munchkins gang-rape the crap out of him. And I?m not talking little Mini-Me sized Muchkins, I?m talking mutated John Holmes style Muchkins.

If anyone feels differently than me I?m coming after you. Not to commit a violent act, mind you, but rather to watch my cat while I visit this punk and teach him another lesson.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: shocksyde

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: AlienCraft

There is no difference, except in scale, between that grandmother you pulled out of your ass, and a very real abused cat in the video.
THIS is the distinction you do not know, can not admit to, will not or may not ever understand.

So there is no difference between a human that is (hypothetically) murdered and a cat that is abused? Are you honestly claiming that?

You think torturing/killing animals is just as serious as torturing/killing people?

I honestly think so. Both show mental issues.

So what did you have for dinner last night? Hopefully there wasn't any meat there.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Coupled with the fact that you're unaware of the link between animal abusers and serial murders, and one really must wonder why the rest of us are even giving you the time of day.

First you criticize me for having poor reading comprehension, then you prove that you either have poor reading comprehension or you just didn't read the thread.

This has been covered quite clearly. Nowhere in the thread did I deny a link between animal abusers and serial murders. I merely (and correctly) pointed out that just because most serial killers have a history of torturing animals, this does NOT mean that most people that have a history of torturing animals become serial killers.

This is not a difficult concept to understand. Are you seriously trying to claim otherwise?

Maybe if you weren't so deflective, obtuse, and indirect, you wouldn't be so misunderstood. Bonus points for not putting words in people's mouths, altering their posts when quoting because you're desperate, etc.

Back to my point:

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Also, it's an absurd stretch to think that just because a kid made a video of him scaring a cat that he's going to be murdering people.

You see, son, it's not an absurd stretch. The link between the two is well established and undisputed. You interpreted jpeyton's post as implying a 1-to-1 relationship. Maybe that was his intent, maybe it was not. What's absurd is you zeroing in on that and picking a fight. You were splitting hairs after making an assumption and you were called on it. Deal with it and move on.

If you were half as intelligent as you've convinced yourself you are, you'd recognize when it's time to throw in the towel. If nothing else, this has become quite tired and boring.

There are many cases of animal cruelty, but hardly any (relatively speaking) cases of mass murderers. Sure, the mass murders get a lot of airtime on the news, but they are generally rare cases.

While you can point out that most mass murderers began their careers of murdering people by torturing animals, this does NOT mean that most people who torture animals become mass murderers.

I clearly pointed this out before.

I understand that due to your primitive thought process you feel the need to create a strawman argument and claim that I said that there was no link, but unfortunately for you this is never what I said.

It's up to you to understand this, I cannot help you.

You picked a stupid fight because of an assumption on your part and your desire to split hairs so you could shoehorn your argument into reality. Fail. Likewise, after your troll posts and lame post modifications, you are the last person around here who should be crying over strawmen.

If you put as much effort into your analysis as you do trying convince yourself you're an "intellectual", we'd be able to take you more seriously and you wouldn't be so "misunderstood".

I'm going to end with this and leave the remaining slim pickins' of flesh on your bone for the next wave of pirhanna: "innocent until proven guilty" is the domain of the legal system. A jury's conviction or lack thereof is of little correlation to a person's true guilt. You saw the video. You saw a masked man slam a cat's head against a floor repeatedly, then against a wall repeatedly, being smacked, punched, and sprayed. All while desperately trying to get away. This is irrefutable. Furthermore, as others have stated, that kind of submissiveness in a cat is extremely out of the ordinary and is indicative of a history of abuse. Failure to recognize or acknowledge this on your part only contributes to our conviction that you lack basic analytical and reasoning abilities, contrary to what you keep trying to sell us. Trying to deny what we can all see eradicates your credibility, so efforts to continue to try to operate under that credibility is quite futile on your part.

So continue to keep posing as an "intellectual". The frustration with you ceased some time ago and has since progressed to sadness with a side of mild amusement. By all means, continue.

He's confused intellectual with sophist.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: shocksyde

Originally posted by: 91TTZ

Originally posted by: AlienCraft

There is no difference, except in scale, between that grandmother you pulled out of your ass, and a very real abused cat in the video.
THIS is the distinction you do not know, can not admit to, will not or may not ever understand.

So there is no difference between a human that is (hypothetically) murdered and a cat that is abused? Are you honestly claiming that?

You think torturing/killing animals is just as serious as torturing/killing people?

I honestly think so. Both show mental issues.

So what did you have for dinner last night? Hopefully there wasn't any meat there.

It?s pretty well known that you are a total moron but you just took it even further by trying to equate the commercial slaughter of livestock to torture

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
To appease the audience here, allows me to present a new reply to this video:

This is horrible!

This punk deserves to go to prison for 20 years minimum. Period! If I had a rubber hose I?d beat him with it. Then me, Amused, Alkemyst, and shocksyde?s 100 foot cat would roll up on this little Hitler and take turns beating the crap out of him.

I hope this Oklahoma hick has a tornado suck him up and drop him off in Oz, where a gang of angry cat-loving Munchkins gang-rape the crap out of him. And I?m not talking little Mini-Me sized Muchkins, I?m talking mutated John Holmes style Muchkins.

If anyone feels differently than me I?m coming after you. Not to commit a violent act, mind you, but rather to watch my cat while I visit this punk and teach him another lesson.

Why don't yoiu just go fuck off somewhere else?

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: 91TTZ
To appease the audience here, allows me to present a new reply to this video:

I'm sorry, we can't possibly understand your post with such horrific spelling errors. It's "allow", not "allows". Please, we're intellectuals here and cannot be bothered to decipher such nonsense. As you well know, spelling mistakes like this call into question your entire argument and it's obviously indicative of total failure on your part.