Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Glaug-Eldare

(1,089 posts)
14. AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Thu Jan 3, 2013, 11:29 PM
Jan 2013

Mail Message
At Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:06 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Good. Fuck nose-picking gun fucks. nt
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=355867

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

This is extremely uncivil!

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Jan 3, 2013, 09:16 PM, and the Jury voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: It's not civil. It's oddly worded as well. Ultimately, the poster is exclusively telling people to fuck who are already categorized as "fucks" Furthermore, the poster isn't referring to all "fucks," but only those who pick their nose.

That's a pretty small subset of people. While I realize that this is not a reason or justification to treat them differently, telling fucks to fuck is sort of like telling fliers to fly, eaters to eat, or thinkers to think--except with expletives.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Is that the offensive part, that gun owners pick their noses?
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: Oh, onehandle, couldn't you have phrased that differently?
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: It's not personally directed at anyone.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT and said: this is a rude, unnecessary post
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The DU is by far in favor of gun control. JFK, MLK, RFK, John Lennon,

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

a step in the best direction fascisthunter Jan 2013 #1
Reloading doesn't seem to take this guy very long. GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #2
Loughner fumbled the reload and was tackled. Ptah Jan 2013 #3
No, his magazine jammed. GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #6
Lots of practice Lordquinton Jan 2013 #7
Practice creates muscle memory. GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #8
As carrying spare mags isn't a problem, there shouldn't be any arguement against this bill Kaleva Jan 2013 #18
Except rrneck Jan 2013 #26
Some of them did reload several times Lordquinton Jan 2013 #28
So you imagine that if larger mags were banned... GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #30
The killer didn't buy equipement Lordquinton Jan 2013 #46
That's Nice. Please Stay The Fuck Out Of My Neighborhood. (nt) Paladin Jan 2013 #38
You already have other people with CHLs in your neighborhood. GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #42
there is a big flaw in this argument, from the gun nut side pasto76 Jan 2013 #13
But that guy isn't all potential shooters. ProgressoDem Jan 2013 #15
Even a poorly trained person can do a swap in three seconds. N/T GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #21
I haven't been to the range in years and I can swap 1911 mags in under two. nt rrneck Jan 2013 #27
Well then great, let's get rid of the high capacity clips because it doesn't make a difference. ProgressoDem Jan 2013 #43
he's not under much duress either. frylock Jan 2013 #16
Look out, here they come... Kingofalldems Jan 2013 #4
Good. Fuck nose-picking gun fucks. nt onehandle Jan 2013 #5
AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service Glaug-Eldare Jan 2013 #14
nose-picking? Really? snooper2 Jan 2013 #37
If it's good enough for Obama it should be good enough for you! L0oniX Jan 2013 #40
And pick nose-fucking grabber/banner fucks. n/t PavePusher Jan 2013 #47
Step in the correct direction... former_con Jan 2013 #9
Lets see if it comes to a vote. WHEN CRABS ROAR Jan 2013 #10
K&R SunSeeker Jan 2013 #11
K&R ReRe Jan 2013 #12
Anyone have info on the actual bill such as the number? Kaleva Jan 2013 #17
10 shot limit, will encourage shooters to 'up caliber' quadrature Jan 2013 #19
Another bill proposed to show they are for Gun Control, knowing it will never see the light of day happyslug Jan 2013 #20
Well, as soon as I get the bill number, I'll be calling and writing my rep asking him to co-sponser Kaleva Jan 2013 #22
It will keep magazine sales record-high, though. sofa king Jan 2013 #25
Sphincter-GunNuts Never Got the Memo... triplepoint Jan 2013 #23
As far as I know, those are legal. Kaleva Jan 2013 #24
A GUN NUT Sphincter Says What? triplepoint Jan 2013 #29
Kaleva is anti-gun. See his post #20. GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #32
I did get a good laugh when I read that post! Kaleva Jan 2013 #36
legal Duckhunter935 Jan 2013 #33
Not illegal. ATF can't do anything. GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #31
Turns good ammo into noise with few hits on target center. GreenStormCloud Jan 2013 #41
Legal and completely useless sir pball Jan 2013 #44
A GUN NUT Sphincter Says What? triplepoint Jan 2013 #48
What job do you think they should do exactly? sir pball Jan 2013 #49
It takes a couple hours practice to learn to change mags quickly jmowreader Jan 2013 #34
Doesn't ban possession as far as I can see. nt hack89 Jan 2013 #35
The bill appears to be a refiling of H.R. 308 "The High Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act" Kaleva Jan 2013 #39
Not that I think it'll pass, but no real skin off my nose sir pball Jan 2013 #45
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Dems introduce high-capac...»Reply #14