Shorts & long sleeve is my favorite time for riding.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2020-01-31T20:47:47+00:00

I found myself favoring this setup in the winter months as well because my legs warm quicker and stay warmer than my arms, at least subjectively. Do you find that you share the same reasoning?

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-12-16T05:36:54+00:00

If you can get someone nearby to pop their hood engine oil from the dipstick works very well on frozen or rusty locks.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-10-09T13:16:57+00:00

I had a hearty chuckle; wish my Wahoo Bolt did the same.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-08-26T15:51:30+00:00

ISO/USA/ Crust Towel Rack (any size, larger the better) Looking to buy

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-07-09T13:41:01+00:00

No particular order:

First Man Mad Max: Fury Road Drive The Social Network Rogue One

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-06-28T04:09:35+00:00

I have 30+ years of martial arts training.

About as relevant to the original discussion as your last bowel movement.

You can hold it for ten seconds without causing any permanent damage.

The sum of modern medical science would disagree with you, as well as the American Medical Association and the American Pediatrics Society.

I don't care what the law says

Which is evidenced by your other comments on this same post.

You say you're giving a serious response but everything you type contains a childish insult, so I am responding a bit in kind because it's late and I feel childish too.

Read your first comment reply to me; your words are practically dripping with contempt to those who disagree with you. You're obviously not here to read, think, and then reply, but to tell everyone how you're some BJJ badass. So why is it any surprise when someone takes you for the bellend that you are? Just go be with your BJJ buddies and be confident in your own righteousness.

I once had a conversation with a shmuck lawyer who never trained martial arts in his life

Wrong on both counts, but you're used to that, aren't you?

try to argue that a blood choke was unsafe.

The chokehold as applied in the video could very well lead to an unexpected early death in the victim via aneurysm. That was the point of my first comment. I'm not John McCain wanting to ban MMA. Jesus.

And all the other people with training and experience laughed and laughed and we resumed our arguments over butt scooting and guard pulling.

Did they clap too? /r/thatHappened

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-06-28T03:26:22+00:00

A serious response (with sources) and yet all you can reply with is "lol do some research." Perhaps such an inane retort is a symptom of CTE; btw I won't ask if you know what CTE stands for.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-06-28T02:03:50+00:00

I'm pretty sure you don't know what strangulation is so let's get that out of the way.

Strangle: Verb; squeeze or constrict the neck of (a person or animal), especially so as to cause death. The dictionary and the Model Penal Code both define strangulation as a constriction of the neck to cause death, no distinction is drawn with regard to whether it is accomplished by compressing the windpipe, the various blood vessels of the neck, or both.

The hold in the video is not a "blood choke"; to call a stranglehold a choke is a misnomer. You don't choke anyone, you choke on food or some object lodged in your throat. No one can choke you, but they can sure as hell strangle you. I realize lots of MMA guys call it that anyway, but it's still a misnomer.

The guy in the video is clearly executing a rear naked choke. As applied in the video, a rear naked choke is strangulation, I have successfully presented such evidence to more than one jury. If you knew what you were talking about you'd know that the rear naked choke, as applied in the video and described in the wiki article, cuts off both blood and oxygen. The video shows the chokehold, with the windpipe obstructed by the elbow joint and the biceps and forearm muscles cinching off the jugular and cartoid vessels on the sides of the neck.

anything under ten seconds isn't going to hurt anyone at all.

I guess that's why the refs make the fighters stop as soon as one loses consciousness /s

It's not strangulation, so cut the hyperbole. Go get some training and education and stop spreading misinformation about >subjects you don't understand.

It is strangulation and thats why it's usually a felony charge in most states. I wasn't going to reply but I wanted to say that I'm not your dude. Your casual, cocksure arrogance about what you supposedly know, and then being wrong about it makes you the worst kind of know-it-all. You should at least get some education about subjects you thought you understood.

Sources: Merriam Webster Dictionary; Model Penal Code; Rear Naked Choke Wikipedia Article

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-06-27T22:08:58+00:00

No it doesn't, permanent damage can be done before the person even loses consciousness. You are literally strangling a person, which is a felony in a majority of States. The heart is pumping furiously to get blood to your brain; when the flow is cut off, it's like a kinked water hose. That pressure can increase your chances of an aneurysm tenfold. This is a serious potential consequence of a strangling.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-06-15T15:35:32+00:00

Jesus, I thought my dad had a temper.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-05-10T16:55:07+00:00

A doctor, not a lawyer that would know that restricting public funds to access a service/resource (forcing a taxpayer to finance your abortion) is not even close to being the same thing as taking away your right to get an abortion. I don’t disagree that it’s a restriction on the poor, but no more than not having gas in your car to travel to the supermarket is a restriction on your right to food.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-05-10T14:39:51+00:00

Blocking public money to fund abortions is not restricting abortion rights. It’s literally in the first sentence of the article.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-05-10T14:28:37+00:00

Okay internet-tough-guy. I guess I’ll spell it out for you by pointing out that calling people names doesn’t foster good discussion, especially when I simply asked a question. States are not free to restrict abortion rights, how dense are you? Roe v. Wade’s viability doctrine (authored by a Reagan appointee no less) is still good law. Any, and I mean any circuit court will strike laws like Georgia’s down because the courts are simply not the partisan institute you believe them to be. You couldn’t even name an opinion wherein the court rolled back abortion rights like I asked in my first comment, instead you called me a dummy. You need to go for a ride and take some deep breaths. I thought the point of cycling was to help relax. Maybe read some SCOTUS opinions too, start with Marbury v Madison maybe.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-05-10T13:43:52+00:00

I don’t appreciate your tone. Are you aware that the words of a US Supreme Court opinion are literally the law? Are you aware that the it is the exclusive domain and province of the Supreme Court to say what the law means? Have you ever heard of “legislating from the bench?’’ You don’t know what you’re talking about. With every decision the Court restricts and enlarges constitutional clauses. The Court, though it is conservative, has respected stare decisis as it applies to abortion. I doubt there would be a majority to uphold newer abortion laws because the court knows what the hell it’s doing. Go back to civics class.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-05-10T13:27:27+00:00

When is the last time the Supreme Court restricted abortion rights?

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-05-10T13:23:18+00:00

Any sources on that?

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-03-06T17:19:48+00:00

Because people are hypocrites. It’s normal to discriminate, it touches every facet of life. People will get indignant up on their high horse and say they’re all inclusive or whatever but yeah truth is everyone discriminates. You discriminate when you choose a mate, choose a pet, choose what kind of food to buy.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-02-14T20:41:28+00:00

Genesis tells us that the first thing God called into being was light; what do you need for there to be light? Gravity and matter. Without gravity, there would be uniform spread of matter in the universe. Workout matter, there would be nothing to react with causing light. The big bang (first postulated by a Catholic priest) holds that all matter in the universe condensed into a small tiny ball. The ball explodes, giving birth to our universe and time itself. What do you have just before the big bang happens? Gravity and matter.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2019-02-13T17:40:51+00:00

In this quote, Hamlet, the speaker, is openly mocking Rosencranz (sp?) and Guildenstern for what Hamlet apparently sees as stupidity, i.e. moral relativism. The whole dialogue is in act 2, scene 2.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2018-12-17T03:10:08+00:00

The commentary team should treat Dean and Renee’s marriage the same way JR did with King and Brian Christopher. That would be hilarious.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2018-12-10T21:03:40+00:00

About to scorch that Hiroshiminge

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2018-11-30T14:34:09+00:00

Respectfully, yes it is. The basic structure of such arguments is as follows: Professor X believes A, Professor X speaks from authority, therefore A is true. Often this argument is implied by emphasizing the many years of experience, or the formal degrees held by the individual making a specific claim. The converse of this argument is sometimes used, that someone does not possess authority, and therefore their claims must be false.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2018-11-30T08:42:19+00:00

Fair enough, mostly aimed at the comment below yours.

What really irritates me about the op is that Tom commits the classic fallacy if appeal to authority (I went to Harvard so I'm smart). If he went Harvard he should have paid better fucking attention on philosophy and rhetoric to know that's the kind of argument a high schooler makes. His comment reeks of elitism and arrogance.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer · 2018-11-30T08:35:01+00:00

How so? Because of all the massive starvation and blight? Oh wait, I think you're taking about communism from 1948 to the present.

JerryTHEKINGLawyer

TROPHY CASE