Guest viewing is limited

Ripoff joint busted

but the whole point ( in this case) of having a gun is just to intimidate ... why do you think you would have actually shot on a guy only throwing cans at you?

Well, that's kind my point about avoiding altercations at all costs while armed. I basically had two choices. I could roll with my temper and pride and confront the guy hollering and throwing things at me (who was very obviously mentally ill, on drugs or both) and if that escalated into a physical altercation where I'm attacked by a crazed drug addict (happens a LOT in that city, even today) and I'm forced to shoot him to avoid bodily harm to myself, the social justice warrior prosecutor and judge in that city could've pulled CCTV footage of ME approaching HIM and ruled that I instigated a fight with a marginalized, disenfranchised, economically-challenged victim of immigration status and then shot him because I'm a racist.

Or, I could just walk away. I chose to just walk away.

And to be perfectly honest, even if I wasn't armed I would've walked away. I'm an extremist germophobe and the idea of getting into a fistfight with some homeless crackhead is just YUCK, even if I had gloves or hand sanitizer on me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MikeH
Well, that's kind my point about avoiding altercations at all costs while armed. I basically had two choices. I could roll with my temper and pride and confront the guy hollering and throwing things at me (who was very obviously mentally ill, on drugs or both) and if that escalated into a physical altercation where I'm attacked by a crazed drug addict (happens a LOT in that city, even today) and I'm forced to shoot him to avoid bodily harm to myself, the social justice warrior prosecutor and judge in that city could've pulled CCTV footage of ME approaching HIM and ruled that I instigated a fight with a marginalized, disenfranchised, economically-challenged victim of immigration status and then shot him because I'm a racist.

Or, I could just walk away. I chose to just walk away.

And to be perfectly honest, even if I wasn't armed I would've walked away. I'm an extremist germophobe and the idea of getting into a fistfight with some homeless crackhead is just YUCK, even if I had gloves or hand sanitizer on me.

ah ah, you’re so Japanese actually
1. Avoiding trouble
2. Avoiding germs
;)
 
but the whole point ( in this case) of having a gun is just to intimidate ... why do you think you would have actually shot on a guy only throwing cans at you?


This actually brings up another interesting point regarding stupid gun laws in America. To your point about having a firearm to "intimidate," that would be illegal in most municipalities. If I pull out my firearm, even legally carried and licensed for the purpose of intimidating someone, that constitutes "brandishing" and I believe that can be a felony in most places. Convicted of that, I'd be stripped of my right to own/carry a firearm for the rest of my life.

Of course, if the vagrant were to do something like pull a knife on me, of course I would be legally justified in drawing my firearm and pointing it at him to dissuade him from attacking me and this sounds good in theory. However, in every CCW/tactical class the instructors will tell you, the vast majority of justified self-defense shooting situations happen when the armed victim and attacker are no more than three yards apart, meaning you have less than two seconds from the time you recognize an attack coming and the instant you pull the trigger.

So in short, if the guy is fifteen yards away and pulls out a knife and then I draw on him, I'm probably going to jail for brandishing. Would it prevent the attack? Maybe, maybe not. But the law says I have to wait until the attack is "imminent," meaning the asshole is basically on me, and then at that point I'd better be pulling the trigger because otherwise I'm probably dead and still may end up at the morgue if my shots aren't placed effectively.

Doesn't make much sense, does it? It's just like the stupid laws in blue counties where you're basically prohibited from defending your own property. Just last month in a nearby town, a pack of teenage thugs robbed a guy's house, came back with guns to rob him again, were shooting at his house, the guy fires three rounds into the group while they're in his yard shooting at him, end up killing one of the teens and now he's being charged with murder and firearms violations. Why? Because here, you have to wait until the asshole BREAKS INTO your home and is INSIDE your home and then trying to murder you before you can shoot back. Gangbangers shooting at your wife and kids from your doorstep? Nope, gotta just get down and pray and hope the cops get there in less than the national average of 15 minutes.

Elect liberal politicians, get liberal policies. People here deserve what they vote for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoapFTW
This actually brings up another interesting point regarding stupid gun laws in America. To your point about having a firearm to "intimidate," that would be illegal in most municipalities. If I pull out my firearm, even legally carried and licensed for the purpose of intimidating someone, that constitutes "brandishing" and I believe that can be a felony in most places. Convicted of that, I'd be stripped of my right to own/carry a firearm for the rest of my life.

Of course, if the vagrant were to do something like pull a knife on me, of course I would be legally justified in drawing my firearm and pointing it at him to dissuade him from attacking me and this sounds good in theory. However, in every CCW/tactical class the instructors will tell you, the vast majority of justified self-defense shooting situations happen when the armed victim and attacker are no more than three yards apart, meaning you have less than two seconds from the time you recognize an attack coming and the instant you pull the trigger.

So in short, if the guy is fifteen yards away and pulls out a knife and then I draw on him, I'm probably going to jail for brandishing. Would it prevent the attack? Maybe, maybe not. But the law says I have to wait until the attack is "imminent," meaning the asshole is basically on me, and then at that point I'd better be pulling the trigger because otherwise I'm probably dead and still may end up at the morgue if my shots aren't placed effectively.

Doesn't make much sense, does it? It's just like the stupid laws in blue counties where you're basically prohibited from defending your own property. Just last month in a nearby town, a pack of teenage thugs robbed a guy's house, came back with guns to rob him again, were shooting at his house, the guy fires three rounds into the group while they're in his yard shooting at him, end up killing one of the teens and now he's being charged with murder and firearms violations. Why? Because here, you have to wait until the asshole BREAKS INTO your home and is INSIDE your home and then trying to murder you before you can shoot back. Gangbangers shooting at your wife and kids from your doorstep? Nope, gotta just get down and pray and hope the cops get there in less than the national average of 15 minutes.

Elect liberal politicians, get liberal policies. People here deserve what they vote for.

... including mass shootings?
Come on
Gun laws are stupid because there are way too many guns in the first place, owned by people who are mentally ill or just don’t give a fuck about the laws anyway, and the NRA gets away with anything they want (or rather can lobby-out anything they don’t want).
 
... including mass shootings?
Come on
Gun laws are stupid because there are way too many guns in the first place, owned by people who are mentally ill or just don’t give a fuck about the laws anyway, and the NRA gets away with anything they want (or rather can lobby-out anything they don’t want).
EEEEeeHHHHhhhhhhh
 
... including mass shootings?
Come on
Gun laws are stupid because there are way too many guns in the first place, owned by people who are mentally ill or just don’t give a fuck about the laws anyway, and the NRA gets away with anything they want (or rather can lobby-out anything they don’t want).

I think for the most part, the NRA is grossly overestimated and also unfairly vilified by most media outlets and political groups. They're nothing more than a counter-balance to the left-wing radicals (like Beto O'Rourke) who actually advocate for creating a police state and a national police force to raid the homes of law-abiding citizens and confiscate legally-owned firearms. Notice how far Beto's campaign got.

America just has firearms woven into its culture. We're never going to ban guns because the vast majority of citizens would never approve of it and in the end, as with everything else we've tried banning, it'd just create a very lucrative black market. For better or worse, that's part of life here. The problem is the cultural shift that basically began when those two idiots shot up Columbine H.S. in 1999. From that day, any frustrated, insecure or batshit crazy teen who didn't feel loved now had in the back of his/her head the notion of a mass-shooting. I was living 30 minutes away from Columbine when it happened and the sad part is that this took place in Colorado, which is a state with one of the highest levels of gun ownership per household in the country and also some of the absolutely lowest levels of crime. Until then, it wasn't uncommon at all to see kids with shotguns on the back windows of their trucks when they came to school, because every school had a hunting/marksmanship class and kids would go to the range or hills with their teachers after school was out. It's still a very pro-gun state with very low crime but the increasing number of fucking Californians moving in and bringing their bullshit politics and crime with them will eventually ruin the state and others around it.

And even if you could snap your fingers and make every gun in the world disappear, all that would really do is make the nutjobs more innovative, the next time one of them wants to kill a lot of people. Like those jihadis in France who use trucks to mow down dozens of people in the street. Or those ingrate shitbag refugee brothers who used pressure cookers in Boston. Or the whacko in Ikeda, Osaka, who went into the elementary school with two steak knives and killed a dozen kids.

All the laws in the world won't change the fact that human beings are, at the end of the day, still animals. So with that in mind, if you gave me the choice between living in a red state where 99% of the people around me are legally armed, or living in a blue state where firearms are "banned," I'd take the red state all day long.
 
This thread sure did veer off topic with bullshit.

Anyways, yeah there were plenty of Reddit threads about this place and the sports bar Frenchy posted about. I suggest keeping an eye out on the Tokyo/JapanTravel subreddit and use the search feature there for bars that someone might be trying to get you to go to. It’s been useful.
 
Unfortunately for me, this was in an extremely liberal left-coast city and in accordance with liberal, forward-thinking progressive logic, I, as an Asian American--because we do stuff like get up early, go to school, go to work, work hard, follow the rules, be successful, racist WASPy stuff like that--are no longer officially members of a "protected" minority class and therefore subject to the same race rules as white folks. So, had I confronted the homeless illegals screaming racist obscenities at me and ended up having to put three rounds in one of them to defend myself using my fine, customized Sig Sauer 9mm (which is German, so I must also be a white supremacist) I'd probably be sitting in a jail cell now on federal hate crime charges. The ACLU would represent the illegals pro-bono and demand compensation, eventually taking away my condo so all 57 of the illegal's family members could squat in it and cook meth while the rest of the cousins staged a Brown Lives Matter march up and down the boulevard until the asshole I shot got posthumously awarded the keys to the city and a Che Guevara Community Service Award.

Fortunately, that was back in the dark, bigoted era of 2002. Now in 2019, I "identify" as a bi-curious lesbian transgender hermaphrodite communist quarter-Tanzanian quarter-Guatemalan quarter-Syrian quarter-Alaskan-Indian disabled bi-polar vegan carnivore with a medical marijuana card and service animal. Therefore, I'm cool to shoot just about anyone and the same ACLU will help me get away with it.

And i identify as a schizophrenic gender fluid white supremacist Japanese anime character with native American ancestry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Keihan Chikan
That outfit has new venue just down the street from R2 called "Las Tokyo" .... beware!!
R2 Supper Club? I got a story to tell about that place that happened to me 2 months ago. That place is infested with fake women looking to take you to another bar. They got something shady going on with credit card transactions as well. Will update later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: just4fun
And i identify as a schizophrenic gender fluid white supremacist Japanese anime character with native American ancestry.

You mean Elizabeth Warren has an anime character now? That woman is amazing!
 
Some serious disinformation is being put out. The vast majority of Americans go about their daily lives without getting into or thinking about getting into gun, knife, or broken bottle battles. Plus, the murder rate in the liberal blue west coast cities being discussed is much lower than the manly, tough red, southern and mid-western cities that celebrate walking around strapped all the time. And even those cities, like St. Louis, New Orleans, Mobile, Jacksonville, and Indianapolis, are generally safe as the poor generally prey on the poor that reside within their neighborhoods.
 
I call BS on the désinformation’s désinformation. Went to New Orleans, did not find it especially “manly”. In fact there was lot of boobs flashing and bars with transsexuals etc... sometimes even transsexuals flashing their boobs. But ok, I just visited the French Quarter so what would you expect :D