TacTissy now a DV victim

Status
Not open for further replies.
c'mon you'd hit it


Xena-Warrior-Princess-xena-warrior-princess-24707936-500-373.jpg

That's a much different kind of hitting.
 
There's a difference between self defense , or putting some one in there place .
Vs hitting your wife or husband because your a ass hole or had a verbal argument .

I knocked a girl out cold after she smashed a bottle over my head at a bar. She thought I grabbed her ass . My back was to her . I just turned and swung and dgaf it was a girl. Id do the same thing today and would of done the same thing if it was her bf that broke a bottle over my head. You cross aline you should expect some thing to happen to you.


On the same token if I came home and had a gf and caught her in bed with a dude . I might hit the dude but I wouldn't hit the girl for some thing like that. Push her out the door naked then toss her shit out the window yes... If it was my friend I mos def would punch him in the face .
 
Last edited:
All I see is a veiled attempt for views. Yea we've all been wondering why you've been gone so long (a WHOLE 8 days!) but we have to respect your privacy while you post this vague explanation of a DV scenerio on the most public and social site in existence.

She is pretty hot though.
 
There's a difference between self defense , or putting some one in there place .
Vs hitting your wife or husband because your a ass hole or had a verbal argument .

I knocked a girl out cold after she smashed a bottle over my head at a bar. She thought I grabbed her ass . My back was to her . I just turned and swung and dgaf it was a girl. Id do the same thing today and would of done the same thing if it was her bf that broke a bottle over my head. You cross aline you should expect some thing to happen to you.


On the same token if I came home and had a gf and caught her in bed with a dude . I might hit the dude but I wouldn't hit the girl for some thing like that. Push her out the door naked then toss her shit out the window yes... If it was my friend I mos def would punch him in the face .

WTF is 'putting someone in there (their) place'? Even using that term indicates that you decide what 'their place' is.

If you catch someone banging your spouse/SO, the epic beatdown they should get is getting them out of YOUR place.
 
WTF is 'putting someone in there (their) place'? Even using that term indicates that you decide what 'their place' is.

If you catch someone banging your spouse/SO, the epic beatdown they should get is getting them out of YOUR place.

Putting some one in there place was a bad choice of words.
More some times people do or say things and should not just get a pass on it. Don't need to hit them persay.
 
Last edited:
There's a difference between self defense , or putting some one in there place .
Vs hitting your wife or husband because your a ass hole or had a verbal argument .

Hitting a spouse because of an argument is by definition "putting them in their place". That's what domestic violence is all about, control.

I knocked a girl out cold after she smashed a bottle over my head at a bar. She thought I grabbed her ass . My back was to her . I just turned and swung and dgaf it was a girl. Id do the same thing today and would of done the same thing if it was her bf that broke a bottle over my head. You cross aline you should expect some thing to happen to you.

She was wrong, you were in the right to defend yourself from someone committing battery with a deadly weapon.

On the same token if I came home and had a gf and caught her in bed with a dude . I might hit the dude but I wouldn't hit the girl for some thing like that. Push her out the door naked then toss her shit out the window yes... If it was my friend I mos def would punch him in the face .

So it's OK to commit violent acts on someone who may not even know they are doing anything wrong but it's wrong to commit violent acts against someone who definitely knows they are doing something wrong? How about a rule that just says, no committing violent acts?

This is why carving out "violence against women" as a "special" bad thing is so fundamentally wrong. If you live your life in the manner of "violence against others" is wrong, what sex organs someone is sporting should be irrelevant. Oh, and it's been barely touched upon in this thread but if someone is a gay male, does it mean they can beat their hubby? It's two guys, right? All good with that under the "no hittin' the wimmens" rule. How about trannys? If they were born a woman, but sporting surgically created male parts, are they a chick or a dude for purposes of this "no hittin' the wimmens" rule? How about if they were born dudes and hacked their junk off?

PS: The transexual questions are rhetorical. I don't care what anyone's views are on whether transexuals are male, female or other. That there is not a consensus answer on that question is the point. We have no need to debate the finer points of that.
 
Last edited:
Hitting a spouse because of an argument is by definition "putting them in their place". That's what domestic violence is all about, control.



She was wrong, you were in the right to defend yourself from someone committing battery with a deadly weapon.



So it's OK to commit violent acts on someone who may not even know they are doing anything wrong but it's wrong to commit violent acts against someone who definitely knows they are doing something wrong? How about a rule that just says, no committing violent acts?

This is why carving out "violence against women" as a "special" bad thing is so fundamentally wrong. If you live your life in the manner of "violence against others" is wrong, what sex organs someone is sporting should be irrelevant. Oh, and it's been barely touched upon but if someone is a gay male, does it mean they can beat their hubby? It's two guys, right? All good with that under the "no hittin' the wimmens" rule. How about trannys? If they were born a woman, but sporting surgically created male parts, are they a chick or a dude for purposes of this "no hittin' the wimmens" rule? How about if they were born dudes and hacked their junk off?

I shouldn't of used put some one in there place in this context. I mean more like people harassing you or your so. Some times getting in that person face and telling them to stop or they will be crossing a line is enough.

Me catching a gf at my house ... I wouldn't hit the guy unless he starts giving me problems about leaving my home. I would make the women just leave.
If it was my friend, he would know Id punch him in the face and push him out the door.

I dead miss wrote what I wanted to say and made a ass of my self .
 
Last edited:
Hitting a spouse because of an argument is by definition "putting them in their place". That's what domestic violence is all about, control.



She was wrong, you were in the right to defend yourself from someone committing battery with a deadly weapon.



So it's OK to commit violent acts on someone who may not even know they are doing anything wrong but it's wrong to commit violent acts against someone who definitely knows they are doing something wrong? How about a rule that just says, no committing violent acts?

This is why carving out "violence against women" as a "special" bad thing is so fundamentally wrong. If you live your life in the manner of "violence against others" is wrong, what sex organs someone is sporting should be irrelevant. Oh, and it's been barely touched upon in this thread but if someone is a gay male, does it mean they can beat their hubby? It's two guys, right? All good with that under the "no hittin' the wimmens" rule. How about trannys? If they were born a woman, but sporting surgically created male parts, are they a chick or a dude for purposes of this "no hittin' the wimmens" rule? How about if they were born dudes and hacked their junk off?

PS: The transexual questions are rhetorical. I don't care what anyone's views are on whether transexuals are male, female or other. That there is not a consensus answer on that question is the point. We have no need to debate the finer points of that.
you said it better in one post than I did in a dozen
thats why you are where you are and im not
 
How about a rule that just says, no committing violent acts?

As my Granny used to say: Do unto others as you would have the do unto you.

It really provides the framework for 99% of the human social contract and all law.
 
Having not checked in on this thread since my initial post, I'm pretty ashamed at some of the commentary against this girl and topic of DV from this group. I expect it from Arfcom GD, not so much here.

If you look at anything in this girl's public history/profiles, you can find nothing that suggests a pitiful attempt at fame or viral stature from this incident, nor could you find anything showing this as an accident, especially if you watched the video.
 
If you look at anything in this girl's public history/profiles, you can find nothing that suggests a pitiful attempt at fame or viral stature from this incident, nor could you find anything showing this as an accident, especially if you watched the video.

Followed her on fb for a long time and I agree with you. Maybe she felt she had some kind of duty as a DV victim to bring light to it, whilst still requesting privacy on details. I guess you can call that attention grabbing if you want to, but I don't see it as the same thing as LOOK AT ME LOOK AT ME bs. If nothing else, I'm sure she was being bombarded by people asking where the hell she went, she's pretty popular on fb.
 
Last edited:
Followed her on fb for a long time and I agree with you. Maybe she felt she had some kind of duty as a DV victim to bring light to it, and I guess you can call that attention grabbing if you want to, but I don't see it as the same thing as LOOK AT ME LOOK AT ME. If nothing else I'm sure she was being bombarded by people asking where the hell she went, she's pretty popular on fb.

That's pretty much my sentiment. Of course she's popular, she's a young, cute, well spoken lady who loves firearms, has class and is what I consider a good role model for young ladies... why wouldn't she be popular with those attributes yanno?
 
Followed her on fb for a long time and I agree with you. Maybe she felt she had some kind of duty as a DV victim to bring light to it, whilst still requesting privacy on details. I guess you can call that attention grabbing if you want to, but I don't see it as the same thing as LOOK AT ME LOOK AT ME bs. If nothing else, I'm sure she was being bombarded by people asking where the hell she went, she's pretty popular on fb.

Could be simply not wanting to give details for legal reasons ....
From a personal view . It's easy to talk to some one tell then xyz happen . The hardest part about talking about abuse is naming the person.
 
I don't think Rico or anyone else is disagreeing with you here.

I'm skeptical about this story, but then again, I'm skeptical about most things. I don't believe everything I read, even less of what I see on the Internet, and far less of what I see on the Internet on Facebook.

It seems to me that if someone really wanted privacy, the worst way in the world to get it would be to go on the most non-private forum in the history of the Earth and post a provocative video about a hot-button issue complete with gory pictures and very little detail.

I think that we can all agree that such a move would bring attention, which is really the opposite of privacy.

What did it for me was when she said something along the lines of, "I'm not going to tell you about it so don't ask me questions." Ok so why then are you on camera with your face bruised and battered talking about it? Hey call me a cynic but it's great publicity for someone trying to get a following going to parlay that into something more. I had never heard of her till this. Like Barnham said, no such thing as bad publicity.
 
Exactly. As soon as this thread was posted I could hear the white knights mounting their steeds... [rolleyes]
Seriously, I need to tell you guys from the bottom of my bleeding heart that in this case, I really take a steaming dump on your opinions. The way I've been raised worked out well for me in the past 50 years. I'll just stick with it.
 
I don't spend much time focusing on pseudo Internet celebrities to really see a reason why there was a need to release a vague and incomplete statement about an incident that she deemed too sensitive that she asks all for privacy, all while posting it on Facebook of all places, which stirs up convo and outrage; ensuring her to get hits and views.

Sorry, still reeks of veiled attention whoring.
 
Last edited:
And even if she's attention whoring, does that change the fact that she got he face bashed in? Maybe she does it to raise awareness, maybe she's trying to get more women to prepare to defend themselves. What you guys are doing here is called projection.
 
And even if she's attention whoring, does that change the fact that she got he face bashed in? Maybe she does it to raise awareness, maybe she's trying to get more women to prepare to defend themselves. What you guys are doing here is called projection.

You know about her incident personally? Call me a cynic or a misogynist, I don't believe jack shit when it comes to these small time Facebook/YouTube celebs, especially when it comes to attention whoring for hits. I'll eat crow if more info comes out but until then, her vague spiel is just that.
 
Last edited:
And even if she's attention whoring, does that change the fact that she got he face bashed in? Maybe she does it to raise awareness, maybe she's trying to get more women to prepare to defend themselves. What you guys are doing here is called projection.
Doesn't change it at all. It's wrong. Violence against women is wrong. Starting random fights in bars is wrong. What I'm saying is attention whoring off it is gross.
 
the power she holds over you because female
wow, I'm don't think i'll ever chime in to try and give some unpopular comments a chance again.You should probably try some of this "Power" you speak of.. it may put you in a better mood.


I spent a little time thinking about why she would post a video and ask for privacy. i probably should watch a few of her other videos other then the one we have all seen.While internet celebrities are often are guilty of attention whoring, it could be as simple as it take alot of time and effort to build a following and the internet is a finicky place. today she could be someone and tomorrow just be nobody.

Also doesn't she generate revenue from her postings?as sad as it is the video she posted could only help ratings,Not that i am saying that it is her sole motive. my guess would be her head is spinning from the indecent and she may not even know or be sure of what she is doing.
 
wow, I'm don't think i'll ever chime in to try and give some unpopular comments a chance again.You should probably try some of this "Power" you speak of.. it may put you in a better mood.
that made me lol
im married all set with the power and she likes power tools

that was some funny stuff
 
Zero tolerance and untouchable topics are dumb.

Can't discuss domestic violence, crimes committed by blacks, Muslim ideologies, and (insert trending sensitive topic here) in a way that isn't approved by the powers to be.

If you were raised never to hit women then great for you.

My recommendation is to not cave anyone's face in. Your actions will be doubly scrutinized if you hurt someone weaker than yourself, that being the elderly, minors, women, outnumbered persons, someone who is in a disadvantaged position (I.e. On the ground), and the disabled. That person can use lethal force against you justifiably due to disparity of force.

Can I see myself in a position in which I would hit a woman? Yeah, the same situation where I would hit anyone; when I or someone I'm protecting is that person getting demolished.

OH NO! I'M THE BOOGYMAN!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
My take on her video was to tell people not to think it couldn't happen to you.
She thought that and was disabused of her presumption of domestic safety.

Even if it is a publicity stunt, the message is correct - don't allow yourself to become a victim.

Phone post: intelligence not included
 
My take on her video was to tell people not to think it couldn't happen to you.
She thought that and was disabused of her presumption of domestic safety.

Even if it is a publicity stunt, the message is correct - don't allow yourself to become a victim.

Phone post: intelligence not included

That's how I interpreted her video as well. This young woman owns guns, knows how to shoot yet someone obviously wasn't impressed enough to control their temper. Her gun shooting abilities couldn't give her any leverage when she apparently was caught off guard, unarmed.
Best regards.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom