3.4 to use a pistol

this man wipes tfu with lugers like its nothing


just saying the argument at the start of the video sets a very dangerous precedence for the future, can the same be applied when 6 people are raiding one person? should he just surrender instead in order to value his life and let the raiders take his shit?

nice video
 
this man wipes tfu with lugers like its nothing


just saying the argument at the start of the video sets a very dangerous precedence for the future, can the same be applied when 6 people are raiding one person? should he just surrender instead in order to value his life and let the raiders take his shit?

nice video
but who asked?
 
I'll defend myself as you raise a good point @Blocked.

I'm pretty sure I explained that the reason you were banned was not for going up against 6 cops with a pistol, however it's pretty self-explanatory why that's an issue to me. The reason you were banned was because after being GP'ed out of a car for a traffic stop (don't ask me man), you decided it was time to assassinate the mayor and started shooting while completely outnumbered. To set the record, taking a risk and failing is not always 3.4; you just need to be able to decipher between when it's suicide and when you have an actual chance.

Nice montage though :cool:
if you wanted to ban me so bad then all you had to do is watch me skip the intersection red light, no need to spend 2 hours in ts digging for a reason
 
I'll defend myself as you raise a good point @Blocked.

I'm pretty sure I explained that the reason you were banned was not for going up against 6 cops with a pistol, however it's pretty self-explanatory why that's an issue to me. The reason you were banned was because after being GP'ed out of a car for a traffic stop (don't ask me man), you decided it was time to assassinate the mayor and started shooting while completely outnumbered. To set the record, taking a risk and failing is not always 3.4; you just need to be able to decipher between when it's suicide and when you have an actual chance.

Nice montage though :cool:
Just making you aware he was not outnumbered we were same amount as cops we had 6 of us 1 with pistol, 4 with smgs and 1 with shotguns. We were also about to shoot the cops anyway to kill the mayor hence why all of us were there because they were transporting him around with 40%+ Sales tax
 
I'll defend myself as you raise a good point @Blocked.

I'm pretty sure I explained that the reason you were banned was not for going up against 6 cops with a pistol, however it's pretty self-explanatory why that's an issue to me. The reason you were banned was because after being GP'ed out of a car for a traffic stop (don't ask me man), you decided it was time to assassinate the mayor and started shooting while completely outnumbered. To set the record, taking a risk and failing is not always 3.4; you just need to be able to decipher between when it's suicide and when you have an actual chance.

Nice montage though :cool:
The thing is 3-4 of us were in the immediate area, not to mention the person with him in the car with a shotgun, I was at the red light clarky was behind the police, DB was across from me https://prnt.sc/usmtig
 
this man wipes tfu with lugers like its nothing


just saying the argument at the start of the video sets a very dangerous precedence for the future, can the same be applied when 6 people are raiding one person? should he just surrender instead in order to value his life and let the raiders take his shit?

nice video
That's different because the raiders initiate the situation not the defender. That's not even slightly comparable. Next time you have a bright idea like this just go speak into a paper bag, close it then burn it. You'll still have the same impact on the argument as well!
 
That's different because the raiders initiate the situation not the defender. That's not even slightly comparable. Next time you have a bright idea like this just go speak into a paper bag, close it then burn it. You'll still have the same impact on the argument as well!
oKgt5hz.png
 
The thing is 3-4 of us were in the immediate area, not to mention the person with him in the car with a shotgun, I was at the red light clarky was behind the police, DB was across from me https://prnt.sc/usmtig
This is a good point and an observation I did somewhat make, but that doesn’t excuse the fact that he started assassination to loophole a ticket. Either way, he can dispute the ban if he feels it to be invalid.
 
This is a good point and an observation I did somewhat make, but that doesn’t excuse the fact that he started assassination to loophole a ticket. Either way, he can dispute the ban if he feels it to be invalid.
You say loophole but we were about to box him in and kill him anyway.
 
This is a good point and an observation I did somewhat make, but that doesn’t excuse the fact that he started assassination to loophole a ticket. Either way, he can dispute the ban if he feels it to be invalid.
the assassination was to be started regardless
 
That's different because the raiders initiate the situation not the defender. That's not even slightly comparable. Next time you have a bright idea like this just go speak into a paper bag, close it then burn it. You'll still have the same impact on the argument as well!
its exactly comparable because the risk to life is directly comparable; who initiates doesnt matter regardless - the decision to initiate the situation was going to be made by others therefore jenga just did it himself; he was going to be forced into a 1v6 but took it on his own terms so if anything the situation @Blocked described is a more significant risk as its not on your own terms?

lol
 
Back
Top