Uber Driver and Activist Arrested in New Hampshire For Videotaping a Bar Bouncer Yelling at Him for Being an Uber Driver

Cops came to his door to nab the activist while he was out buying baby food for his child, due any minute.


Christopher David (who was a character in my 2012 book about the Ron Paul movement, Ron Paul's Revolution, for his earlier efforts as a Ron Paul revolution activist) was arrested today in New Hampshire for a very vital public safety reason: a bouncer mad at him for being an Uber driver (in a city where the government so far has not been satisfied with Uber living up to its legal requirements) turned him into the cops for apparent violation of what, as written, is a pretty terribly restrictive law barring by my read of the law any audio taping under any circumstances without explicit consent from all involved.

Another New Hampshire libertarian activist, Free State Project leader Carla Gericke, beat a similar rap under those same laws because the person she was taping was a cop; it's possible a court might decide the First Amendment rights to film a government employee doing his work that they upheld for Gericke might not apply to a busybody bouncer.

Christopher David mugshot, from his Facebook

Context from the Voices of Liberty website, including the gut punch that this dick move could have made him miss the birth of his child:

Dover, New Hampshire police came to the home of Uber driver Christopher David to arrest him today. His partner was at home, pregnant with their son, who could arrive at any moment. David was out buying baby food. The arrest could very well prevent him from witnessing the birth of his son. The charge? Class B felony wiretapping, for recording a bouncer in public who was attempting to bully David into stopping his work as an Uber driver.

New Hampshire, under pressure from several taxi companies, recently banned Uber from operating in the city, threatening to fine and arrest any drivers who continued to operate. The first citation was issued to Stephanie Franz, a 63-year-old grandmother and school bus driver. Christopher David started the Free Ubercampaign to protest the ban.

On one occasion, David was giving rides in Portsmouth to bar patrons seeking a safe ride home when he was confronted by a bouncer employed by Daniel Street Tavern. The bouncer attempted to bully David into ceasing his work, who in turn recorded the incident.

It's important to note here that David was in his own vehicle at the time, and both parties were on a public street with no expectation of privacy. Nevertheless, the bouncer called the police and decided to press charges of a class B felony for wiretapping, resulting in a warrant being issued for David's arrest, which Dover police served at his residence…. David has decided to turn himself in, and hopes to be out on bail in time to witness his son's birth.

More details today from Seacoastonline:


David was released on $5,000 personal recognizance bail. He said he was also scheduled to be arraigned Jan. 4 at the Portsmouth Circuit Court….

David said in a Portsmouth Herald interview that he's continuing to operate as an Uber driver in Portsmouth, without adhering to the city's new ordinance, as "an act of civil disobedience." Also a web developer, he's been spreading the word about his protest through Facebook, the website FreeUber.org and by posting fliers on utility poles throughout the city…

NEXT: Ben Carson Never Applied to West Point, Obama Spikes Keystone: P.M. Links

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I’m not clear on why the bouncer gives a shit. He drive a cab on the side?

    1. Damn your nimble fingers!

    2. Bouncers get kickbacks from taxi drivers. Uber doesn’t pay.

    3. Yes he does.

    4. Bouncers are not necessarily mental giants. Some people can’t resist poking their noses into other people’s business.

    5. The bouncer may give a shit for the same reason that Fascism often thrives: the urge to join a bullying movement, and bully someone.

  2. I presume the bouncer drives a cab on the side or something?

  3. Wait, I thought that NH is a libertarian paradise?

    1. It’s slightly better than the rest of the US, on most things.

      That doesn’t mean it’s Somalia.

    2. A “libertarian paradise” where voters say the #1 political issue in the 2016 campaign is drug abuse.

    3. Not in the “City of Portsmouth, or Dover” That’s fucking Prog Town to us locals.

    4. Libertarian paradise, as in highest concentration of libertarians. Probably. Still not enough to outnumber the statists.

      1. np,

        Bingo! For instance, you’d have to change your username to “npr” withing the city limits of Portsmouth. Remember, just like here in sunny FL, “blue staters”-AKA, big Gov, corrupt Dem leaning liberals-both retire and move there, to escape the blue state blues that they voted for unthinkingly for their whole lives, then they vote to recreate that in the red state they flee to.

    5. Well, no. It is pretty good in a lot of ways, though. The south east corner, where all of this is happening, is definitely the least libertarian paradise-like part of the state.

  4. it’s possible a court might decide the First Amendment rights to film a government employee doing his work that they upheld for Gericke might not apply to a busybody bouncer.

    Does a police informant operate in a public capacity? ‘Cuz this asshole seems to qualify.

  5. Oh ye of little faith! “This, too, shall pass”. Keep yer FAITH in Guv-Mint Almighty, PWEASE, ah BEGs of ye! Then ye shall see! The veils will be lifted!
    To get us thru for a wee tad here, I am going to lead us all now in prayer and praise?

    Scienfoology Song? GAWD = Government Almighty’s Wrath Delivers

    Government loves me, This I know,
    For the Government tells me so,
    Little ones to GAWD belong,
    We are weak, but GAWD is strong!
    Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
    Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
    Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
    My Nannies tell me so!

    GAWD does love me, yes indeed,
    Keeps me safe, and gives me feed,
    Shelters me from bad drugs and weed,
    And gives me all that I might need!
    Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
    Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
    Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
    My Nannies tell me so!

    1. Oooops, ah fergots the 3d and final, most uplifting stanza…

      DEA, CIA, KGB,
      Our protectors, they will be,
      FBI, TSA, and FDA,
      With us, astride us, in every way!
      Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
      Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
      Yes, Guv-Mint loves me!
      My Nannies tell me so!

      1. I like this.

  6. Light the popehat signal!

    1. Light the woodchipper signal too!

      1. Is there a Tar Baby signal?


  7. Stupid PUNK cops, go find some REAL crime to deal with.


  8. The bouncer probably has a bug up his ass for David, or Uber in general. He goes off on David, David whips out the phone to record, and it probably pisses the guy off.

    I’d bet good money he, or someone he works with, knew about the wiretapping law, and figured it’s a good way to screw with the guy.

    Shame on the cops and DA for agreeing with this. (Like that’ll happen…)

  9. OT: finally a Barak that’s not an asshole.


    1. I’ve never met him, but this Barak seems like he’s had a pretty interesting life.

      Of course, being Israeli, yeah… he’s probably an asshole.

  10. Five woodchippers, no waiting.

  11. “Context from the Voices of Liberty website, including the gut punch that this dick move could have made him miss the birth of his child:”

    Well, there’s a silver lining at least. Some shit you can’t unsee.

    1. Ha. Yeah, to be honest, I wouldn’t have minded sitting in the waiting room for that.

      1. It could’ve been worse. I missed my son’s conception.

        1. I see what you didn’t do there…

      2. I thought it was the most amazing thing I have ever seen in my life, though after I couldn’t cut the cord because I was literally in shock.

      3. Just watching the hole enlarge. Well it is something to see.

        When #3 son was born I had 2 cute female doctors in scrubs (nearly naked) flirting heavily with me with wifey in the same room – not paying attention. Good times.

        1. watching the hole enlarge


    2. Turns out there’s a lot of blood on the inside of Mrs. Woodchipper. They took the kids out through the wall, rather than the door, though.

  12. The unseen, per Bastiat, would be the amount of people who would have been killed, maimed or had their property destroyed had ride share companies been put out of business. Uber, Lyft and the like take hundreds of drunk drivers off the roads each day and night. I wish they were around when I was in my bar hopping days. Cabs used to be a massive pain in the ass.

    1. Good point. The unseen is very important.

      1. The unseen is completely unimportant. To the politicians who are trying to protect their phony-bologna jobs gentlemen.

  13. You fight the good fight David.

  14. a pretty terribly restrictive law barring by my read of the law any audio taping under any circumstances without explicit consent from all involved.

    Maybe my memory is faulty, but doesn’t Reason care about the right to privacy in other contexts?

    If the police had recorded audio of a “public” conversation like this, they’d be up in arms.

    1. This is a public encounter, not a private one. Reason has been largely pushing for cops to wear video cameras.

      1. The exception to eavesdropping laws for cops is due to the fact that they’re performing public duties as agents of the state. Doesn’t apply to bouncers and other non-cops, who retain their privacy rights.

        Again, if the cops had recorded a conversation that occurred in a public street (which does NOT make it a public conversation) without permission of the conversers, Reason would be up in arms.

        1. Reason would be up in arms.

          No they wouldn’t.

        2. So, you believe that news agencies should not be allowed to record in public also?

          1. They should not be allowed to record private conversations that happen to occur in public spaces, without the consent of the parties to the conversation.

            If two people are shouting at each other in the middle of a crowd, that’s a public conversation.

            If two people are talking to each other at a normal conversational tone with no one else around, that is NOT a public conversation. Even if it takes place on public property.

            1. If I open my curtains and run around naked – that’s still taking place in a *private* area, so why would that be illegal?

              1. Not sure what your point is here.

                Indecent exposure laws are also problematic from a libertarian perspective, but that really doesn’t have squat to do with this discussion.

                1. Fuck off, Tulpa. That’s the point, shitneck.

        3. I have never heard of any privacy advocates who believe it should be illegal to record conversations taking place in public.

          a conversation that occurred in a public street (which does NOT make it a public conversation)

          Yes, it does.

          1. It’s Tulpatown, Jordan. Forget it.

          2. No, it does not. If you are talking to a person in a normal conversational tone with nobody else around, it is a private conversation even if it takes place on public property.

            If you think that being on public property means forfeiting privacy in all conversations that take place until you leave public property, I’m sure the NSA would love to hire you for PR.

            1. The NSA is a government agency and has restrictions to match.

              1. Government agencies can do anything that private citizens can.

                1. Government agencies can do anything that private citizens can.

                  Yes, the NSA has every right to record all of the conversations I have with its agents.

                  Not sure what relevance that has to anything, but knock em dead, tiger!

                2. No, you moron, they can not.

                  Government’s have *privileges*, not rights. And we restrict the privileges that we extend to government.

                  1. Governments are composed of people, and those people have rights.

                    If you want to be pedantic, yes, I really meant that the private citizens working for govt agencies can do anything other private citizens can. Accepting employment with the government does not reduce your moral status to that of a cockroach, as you seem to think.

                    1. If you want to be pedantic, yes, I really meant that the private citizens working for govt agencies can do anything other private citizens can.

                      Aww, it’s like you’re a fucking moron who doesn’t know anything at all.

        4. One of the conversers was clearly OK with recording (since he was the one doing it).

          1-party consent for recording strikes me as entirely sufficient.

          2-party consent requirement, is bullshit and always to the benefit of the person who knows they can lie later in court and get away with it (whether that’s a cop or other jury-favored type).

          1. The 2-party consent law in question doesn’t apply to conversations with on-duty cops. Not sure what you think the bouncer was planning to lie about in court, so that’s irrelevant.

            This douche was recording people, for no apparent reason other than so he could post it on YouTube and look cool about it.

            1. His intentions are irrelevant. My statement stands:

              2-party consent requirements (which is what the law we’re talking about puts in place) is total bullshit, cop or no cop.

              When someone is being an asshole to me in a conversation I’m part of, I should 100% be allowed to record him.

              That’s true even if we took as given that recording other people’s conversations is not ok, even in public places.

              1. The bouncer was not being an asshole. He was civilly informing the guy of the law.

                If you think ALL conversations, even polite ones, should be recordable, then say so. Don’t gild the lily by talking about recording assholes.

                1. Every conversation I’m in I should be able to record. Full Stop.

                  Happy now?

                  1. I’m not happy, but at least your “real position” has been laid bare for all to see.

              2. I agree…. there is absolutely no logic behind the 2-party consent law (other than protecting the right to lie at a later date).

                There may be a lot of scenarios where one party recording a conversation and making it public would be a dick move and completely inappropriate or even immoral, but they shouldn’t be illegal. If you told me in confidence that your wife had an affair but you were going to reconcile and I blabbed to everyone I know, that’d be a dick move. Publishing a recording of the same conversation would be even more of a dick move. Either betrayal of confidence might have the consequence of ending all chance of a reconciliation. Such betrayals of confidence might even be a tort. But neither should be a criminal act.

          2. The logical conclusion of the 2-party consent requirement is that you can’t remember and retell a conversation if the other person doesn’t want you to. What’s the difference between memory and an audio recording, except the later is more reliable and harder to falsify?

            Thankfully we don’t actually follow this to the logical conclusion, because it’d be impossible to enforce, but doesn’t that show how ridiculous the reasoning is?

            1. Because people sometimes say things in private that it is better, for all involved, not to have recorded.

              You may recall a kerfuffle about whether Reason should have to tell the govt the identities of people who made certain rash comments involving a federal judge and a certain Macy-Buscemi film. You don’t get much more public than a post on the flipping Internet, yet it was argued that privacy should still hold sway.

              1. Tulpy-poo, this is your worst persona yet. At least some of your personas actually read the arguments they’re responding to, and occasionally respond with an actual argument against it.

              2. Yes, a court-ordered disclosure and a voluntary release of information are exactly the same thing.

                If you’re a mendacious sack of shit.

                1. Those commenters voluntarily typed in their comments and hit submit. Unless there’s some juicy facts I’m not aware of involving coerced commenting.

                  1. You going to show me your magic decoder ring that exposes the IP addresses of the commenters?

                    No? Didn’t think so.

                    Reason was served a court order, and a gag order to boot, both of which are completely incomparable to this scenario.

              3. I’m not certain how *recording a conversation* – in your example a public one – and *turning over information on the ‘official’ identities behind the conversers* have any relation to each other.

                The conversation was public *and* recorded. And that recording was made freely available to all.

                Linking *identities* to the speakers in a conversation is a completely separate issue.

                And whether or not the recorder is a private individual or a government agency is also a consideration.

                1. An audio recording inherently links identity to what was said.

                  1. Shouldn’t a wiretap be a *secret* recording?

                    Obviously the bouncer knew the guy was recording him. I see no privacy issues here. The bouncer had the right to shut his stupid trap and could keep whatever expectations of privacy he had.

                    Also, according to this law, wouldn’t every traffic camera and security camera in the city count as wiretapping, and every single fucking government official should be in jail? (Not that they shouldn’t anyway)

                    1. Obviously the bouncer knew the guy was recording him.

                      How is that obvious? Charges were not filed until the YouTube video of the recording was discovered.

                      Traffic cameras and security cameras don’t record audio, btw.

              4. The posts are public. The non-public information that Reason has about the posters is not public. Reason promises it’s registered users not to disclose that information.

    2. I’ve seen a fruitful discussion over police cameras, with a strong sentiment that dashcams and bodycams help keep the police accountable *and* protect good cops (who exist) from false charges.

      Now, I don’t like being filmed, but if someone – with or without a local news badge takes pictures of me in a public place to which both of us has the right of access, then I can’t think offhand of what kind of protest I can legitimately make.

      Can you think of any complaint I would be able to make against the picture taker or videographer, including the one who works for the local TV news?

      1. If nothing else, people need to remember that *government has no rights, only privileges*.

        Meaning that its perfectly acceptable for us to tell the police that they must wear bodycams and/or tell them that they may not record accept when in an actual encounter with *specific* members of the public and they may not record license plate numbers – even though these are perfectly acceptable things for the general public to do if they choose to.

        A cop, *acting as a cop* has no rights. Only when he’s off-duty and is just another Joe does he have the same rights as everyone else.

        Unfortunately for the cops, they’ve tried to finagle this whole ‘always a cop, all the time’ thing – so they’ll need to learn how to lie in the bed they’ve made.

        1. A cop, *acting as a cop* has no rights.

          So you can assault a police officer and he just has to take it until he goes off-duty?

          1. It’s always fun to watch you grapple with simple ideas and fail, again and again, as always, Tulpypoo.

            Is the lobotomy scar still visible?

            1. Egyptian doc, all through the nose, no scarring!

          2. Looks like Agamemnon went to bed early.

          3. Nope, because we’ve extended certain *privileges* to police who are working in their capacity as law enforcement.

            Completely seperate issue than when they are acting in a private capacity.


            Yes, we could quite easily remove a police officer’s legal protection against assault while he’s on the clock if we chose to.

            1. You just stated that police have no rights. If that is true, then assaulting them cannot be illegal or immoral from a libertarian perspective.

              Obviously, I disagree with you and think that police have the same rights as everyone else. Just seeing if you want to qualify your original statement in view of this implication, or leave it as is.

              1. Rooster|11.7.15 @ 12:40AM|#
                “You just stated that police have no rights. If that is true, then assaulting them cannot be illegal or immoral from a libertarian perspective.”
                Asshole, do you think anyone here is persuaded by such pedantic bullshit?

                “Obviously, I disagree with you and think that police have the same rights as everyone else. Just seeing if you want to qualify your original statement in view of this implication, or leave it as is.”
                Who cares what you ‘agree with’ other than you mommy?

                1. Your argument would be way more convincing if you said “asshole” a few more times.

                  1. Rooster|11.7.15 @ 12:54AM|#
                    “Your argument would be way more convincing if you said “asshole” a few more times.”

                    Your argument might be more convincing if you weren’t a pedantic asshole. But since you ARE a pedantic asshole, I guess we can ignore comments from the pedantic asshole, right, pedantic asshole?

    3. Not sure if you’re one of the resident concern troll socks, but recording in public is not a violation of anyone’s privacy, due to the fact that, you know, it’s in public.

      1. A conversation taking place on a public street can still be private.

        1. Sure it can, Tulpa. Sure it can.

          1. Enter the Tulpa fuckbrain!

          2. If the police surreptitiously record a conversation on a public street between two people who have not consented, is that a violation of their 4th amendment rights or not?

            1. SURREPTITIOUSLY

              1. As this guy was doing. From the seacostonline article:

                Acting Deputy Police Chief Frank Warchol said David was wanted for the wiretapping charge based on a complaint made by the bouncer, who learned he was audio recorded when David’s YouTube video was later brought to his attention. Warchol said the charge has nothing to do with the officer being audio recorded, noting that is legal.
                He said the recording of an unknowing private individual is illegal by state statute and it “will be up to a judge” to issue a final ruling.


                  1. And this is the part of the show where Reasonoids deny the truthfulness of the source that the blog post is based on.

                    1. This is the part where bottomless depth of your failures confront you.

                      You’re…you’re touching yourself right now, aren’t you Tulpa?

                    2. Fuck off Tulpa, you mendacious piece of excrement. Your opinions are worthless here.

                    3. Fuck off Tulpa, you mendacious piece of excrement. Your opinions are worthless here.

                    4. All people who take from others by force are honest and deserve our trust, SIR!

            2. Yes it is. Because they’re *cops*.

              *You* recording that convo is a completely different thing.

              Again – the government has no rights, only privileges and we do not extend the privilege of recording in public to cops except in certain clearly defined situations.

              1. So, the same conversation is private if heard by police but public if heard by non-police?

                What happens if it is heard by both police and non-police? A rip in the space time continuum!

                1. Are you really this pathetically stupid, Tulpa?

                  Do the neighbor children still make fun of you when you leave your house to “teach” math?

            3. Once again, for the slow kids:
              The Constitution limits GOVT, not individuals. As a private citizen, I can’t violate another citizen’s 4th Amendment rights. I certainly could be guilty of theft, trespassing, etc.
              If i want to tell someone a secret that i dont want to become public knowledge, then i shouldnt tell it on a public street.

              1. 4th amendment only applies to private conversations.

                If a conversation is not private for citizen recording purposes, it is also not private for 4th amendment purposes.

            4. The more relevant question would be if police are allowed, under the fourth amendment, to openly record a couple of people who walk up to them and angrily demand that the police sort out their dispute over a drug deal (or slave auction, or whatever trade is still illegal in libertopia).

        2. It is where bikers make all their murder deals.

        3. Yep, like standing on the street corner with your hand in your pocket stroking your cock, all completely inside your pants and not visible, can still be private.

          You can try to make that argument to the judge.

          1. If it’s not visible, how is this going to become a matter for a judge?

          2. Izzis about Jim Morrison alluva sudden? ‘Cause that was a non-anatomically correct guitar in the photos.

        4. The point (at least officially) of laws like this is to protect the privacy of people who may be revealing personal information during a private conversation. If a person knows ahead of time that a conversation will be recorded, then he knows the conversation is not private, and thus it qualifies as a public conversation. If the person doesn’t wish to speak publically, then he can easily stop speaking when the recording begins.

          So, the issue here should be whether or not the bouncer knew he was being recorded before he said anything. The article, or at least the parts quoted here, is kind of vague about this, but I get the impression that David let him know that he was about to be recorded. So the bouncer should’ve had no expectation of privacy from that point on.

          If he didn’t want to be recorded, he should’ve stopped talking right then.

          1. The article, or at least the parts quoted here, is kind of vague about this, but I get the impression that David let him know that he was about to be recorded.

            If you rely on the carefully selected excerpts that Reason presents you with, you’re going to get a skewed view of the story. 10 years ago Reason was honest in quoting external sources, but that’s changed as they’ve drifted toward the left and adopted the dishonest tactics thereof. Follow the link to the seacostonline story and you’ll see that the bouncer did NOT know he was being recorded, and only discovered this when the driver posted the audio as part of a YouTube video.

    4. I think to the extent they do, it’s about cases where a third party (usually a government) commits some sort of trespass to gain access to a private communication between two parties who both consent to keeping it private; not where some asshole unilaterally shouts at someone else and demands that violence be employed to prevent them from speaking about it (that would be a first amendment violation, either or speech or press, depending on context). Maybe he confused an Uber car with a confessional, but that’s his mistake.

    5. Fuck off, Tulpa. You gigantic idiot.

  15. was arrested today in New Hampshire for a very vital public safety reason: a bouncer mad at him for being an Uber driver

    If you want to earn a living without asking permission to do so, move to Somalia, deadbeat.

  16. OT: On November 2nd the Border Patrol union joined the Tarantino boycott.

    On November 6th Border Patrol agent is arrested for decapitation death in South Texas

    authorities found a safe at the home that contained nearly $90,000, around a kilo of cocaine and several handguns.

    Related, from last year: How the border patrol became America’s most out of control law-enforcement agency

    I am sure the Border Patrol union will be asked about these incidents when they take the time to complain about a guy who makes movies.

    1. They can blame Tarantino for inspiring them to lawlessness and violence.

    2. Crusty, I was hoping the Politico article would’ve mentioned guys like Charles Askins in their bit on the history of the BP, but no dice. If you (and them) think CBP is bad now, go read about what guys like Askins thought was normal LEO behavior. From Sheriff Bill Jordan’s recollection:

      [Askins] was a racist — when asked how many men he’d killed, he said, “Twenty-seven, not counting Mexicans and N*****s.

      Plenty of similar cold-blooded quotes from him out there.

    3. The agent was placed on administrative leave for the decapitation, no big deal in those parts. The actual arrest was for hoarding cocaine and not sharing it with his brother officers. That’s a whole heap o’ trouble, bwah, even worse than not paying the cabbie bribe.

  17. I don’t get it. How is recording someone with your wireless phone an instance of wiretapping?

    1. Seriously, I don’t get it. It’s not intercepting a transmission.

    2. lots pf states have laws against recording people without their consent.

      you know when you call customer service and they tell you it might be recorded for quality assurance purposes? its also because if they don’t tell you its a crime.

      1. Wiretapping?

        1. Yeah. This would seem to be one of those occasions where lawmakers didn’t create a new law for this “very troubling prospect”, but just opted to ad a new dimension to current laws.

          I guess NH is a two-party state for recording purposes.

    3. It is astonishing that libertarians think recording a private citizen without their permission should be legal.

      Since apparently all Reason understands is that cops=bad, consider what would happen if another private citizen records something you say that implicates you in a crime, then hands the recording over to the police. 4th amendment doesn’t apply since nothing was searched or seized.

      1. Not only astonishing, but also scurrilous and outrageous.

        1. It’s outrageous, egregious, preposterous!

          1. Are you guys trying out for the role of Ham Brooks?

      2. If an altercation is developing, I’m recording.

      3. Dashcams? Have they been outlawed in some States?

      4. Liberty means the freedom to do whatever you like so long as you don’t harm the life, liberty, or property of others through force or fraud. So why is it astonishing that someone who supports liberty would support recording people? How is that a violation of someone’s life, liberty or property through force or fraud?

        Why do you despise liberty? Isn’t liberty the foundation of American Exceptionalism?

        Oh, fuck. This is Tulpa, isn’t it.

        Whatevs, dude. Suck it.

        1. If two people are talking quietly to each other in public, surreptitious recording of them should probably be a no-no by private citizens and definitely a no-no for police (assuming no warrant). If you are IN a public conversation especially one initiated by someone else, it’s your right to record it openly.

          1. Why? What harm is being done by the act of recording?

            1. It’s a passive invasion of privacy, not very far removed from using equipment to spy on my phone calls. With the expectation of privacy in hushed conversation, recording it is kind of fraudulent.

              1. You have no expectation of privacy in a public place.

              2. I see your point, but on the other hand you are in a public place. If you really want privacy, find some walls and a door.

              3. It is – and its very, very rude.

                It should not be illegal for private citizens to do, however.

                1. It is – and its very, very rude.

                  It should not be illegal for private citizens to do, however.


            2. It is actually very difficult to mesh privacy laws with strict libertarian philosophy. Not just recording conversations, but peeping tom laws, etc.

              It can be argued that recording a conversation that the other party thinks is private is fraud, as Cytotoxic argues above, but this really doesn’t hold water as (a) there is usually no exchange of value involved, and (b) passively allowing the other party to act on mistaken assumptions is not considered fraud in other areas.

              Basically it’s one of those areas where you need to choose between the dogmatic libertarian philosophy or the usual expectations of civilization.

              1. What’s the choice tonight, Tulpa? Fingering your own asshole and staring at the double amputee across the street or having the dog lick peanut butter off your ass crack again?

              2. Peeping Tom laws – exactly.

                Except we have this thing in Libertopia called ‘make sure the blinds are closed’ and ‘trespassing’.

                The combination of which help ensure that very few people are actually running around peeping through windows.

                1. So… your statements of “fact” (about cops having no rights, etc) have actually been based on some imaginary Libertopia, not the real world. That explains a lot.

                  You can’t have a society of civilized human beings where Peeping Tomism is accepted. Of course, with electronic means, closing the blinds is no guarantee that your privacy is safe.

                  1. Rooster|11.7.15 @ 12:52AM|#
                    “So… your statements of “fact” (about cops having no rights, etc) have actually been based on some imaginary Libertopia, not the real world. That explains a lot.

                    What are you asking for those strawmen? I’d like to start a fire.

          2. Sure, I don’t want someone to record personal conversations that I might have in public, but that’s the risk I take. If I want to hide something, then maybe that’s not the best way to do it.

            1. So phone wiretapping should be OK?

              1. Whatevs, Tulpa. Go fuck a turnstile.

                1. Nobody likes having to face the logical conclusion of their pet beliefs.

                  1. Nobody likes having to face the logical conclusion of their pet beliefs Tulpa.


                  2. Wait, did you just use the word ‘logic’, unironically?

                    Oh, tell us more of your intellectual feats of daring, Tulpypoo.

              2. A phone conversation isn’t in *public* now is it?

                1. Depends. If you make a cell phone call standing on a public sidewalk, then it’s just as public as this guy’s conversation with the bouncer was.

                  1. You’ll have to forgive Tulpa for not being able to understand the simple concepts that the rest of us do, since living in his sister’s basement cuts off most light and objective reality.

                    He has to go and get his boom-boom wiped now. UH OH.

                  2. The you record it the same way. And you get one side of the convo.

                    Or you try to record the signal – and so people start encrypting their comms.

                    You’re doing the ‘Motte-and-Bailey’ dance here, again.

                  3. My buddy in forensics assures me that all phone calls that transmit over radio signals can be tapped by jackbooted minions with no thought of asking for a warrant. This business goes back to the Whispering Wires case where Olmstead’s phone was tapped. The same Supreme court that declared handing out photocopies of the 13th Amendment a felony declared listening in on wire phone calls kosher, as long as you are a cop and one of the machine judges signs a “mother-may-I” slip.

              3. The NSA already does it. It’d actually be an improvement if only the phone company was allowed (anyone else would need their cooperation to do it without trespassing).

          3. He wasn’t recording it openly. Read the Seacoastonline news article, not the advocacy page.

            1. What makes a man turn neutered? Lust for balllessness? Flacidity? Or were you just born with a crotch full of empty scrotum?

              1. Adherence to the facts, apparently.

                1. So, you confirmed that you had yourself fixed. Good to know.

                  And good for the rest of us too. You can’t be too careful with the mentally challenged girls at the mental institution you volunteer at.

          4. Um, no. Don’t want others to listen in, take your conversation somewhere private.

      5. It’s not remotely astonishing that Tulpa hasn’t thought this out at all.

      6. consider what would happen if another private citizen records something you say that implicates you in a crime, then hands the recording over to the police

        They conduct an investigation, if they find corroborating evidence you may be charged, and if charged you may be convicted. This is some kind of a surprise to you?

        1. The recording of the conversation can be used as evidence against you in court. They don’t need any corroborating evidence.

          1. Rooster|11.7.15 @ 12:49AM|#
            “The recording of the conversation can be used as evidence against you in court. They don’t need any corroborating evidence.”

            You were the asshole claiming un-registered drones lead to murder, right? Do you actually believe your pedantry? Are you stupid? Or just an raging asshole?

          2. That is entirely a procedural question. If what you said were universally true, then there would be no need for parallel construction. As it turns out, much of the time, such recordings can’t be admitted to court.

            But that is beside the point, which was about whether people should be thrown in jail for making the recording. The two are distinct matters.

            1. As it turns out, much of the time, such recordings can’t be admitted to court.

              Bullshit. There is no 4th amendment protection against legally-obtained third party recordings.

              1. Who said anything about the 4th Amendment? I said it was a procedural question, you illiterate fool.

      7. Yes, it’s shocking that libertarians are deeply opposed to laws restricting freedom of speech, and which are predominantly employed to protect assholes and criminals from the public opprobrium they justly deserve.

        1. Again, this law doesn’t apply to conversations with police on-duty. Even Doherty admits that.

          The bouncer’s comments were neither criminal nor assholish. He has every right to be pissed off and press charges when some douche surreptitiously records him and posts the result on YouTube trying to make himself look cool to idiots, more than a few of which are here.


            Goddamn you are fucking mendacious, why don’t you lie some more?

            1. The douche’s recording device was not.

              1. Ooh, tell me about the spirits that live in electronic devices. Are they good or evil?

  18. Fun fact = lots of bouncers in NY are off-duty cops, ex-cops , or family members of cops. Why would a bar hire a cop’s neer do-well brother?… why, its a mystery… but it would be a shame if they didn’t get their liquor license renewed, or someone were to say they saw underaged kids drinking there…. oh, you think you can find a spot for him? Why that’s just fantastic.

    1. Most of the ones I have interacted with are raging assholes so yeah that makes sense.

    2. That would explain why Tulpa’s spending so much energy defending one.

  19. Holy shit. That audio on YT makes this guy sound like a grade-A asshole. The bouncer was just telling him about the law very calmly. He wasn’t “bullying” him. Same with the cop at the beginning of the video — very nonconfrontational, just telling him about the law and that he’s risking getting summonsed. The guy recording comes up with some irrelevant bullshit about Uber negotiating with the city, which is totally irrelevant to the fact of what the law is now.

    If you disagree with the law, fine. So do I. If this guy was practicing “civil disobedience” by breaking the law (a very profitable type of civil disobedience unless he’s giving the rides for free) then he should expect to going to jail, rather than whining about missing his child’s birth. That’s what civil disobedience leads to. That’s what happened to Rosa Parks and the civil rights protesters in the 60s. Today we would agree that they were right to do what they did, but they suffered at the time. Maybe he should have found a less momentous point in his life to practice “civil disobedience”.

    1. Your “objections” are duly noted.

      1. I knew going in that Reasonoids were going to believe what they want to believe regardless of the facts.

        It is enlightening to see that the hatred toward cops has now extended to hatred toward anyone who cooperates with the cops.


        2. I never took you for a literal copfucker, Tulpa.

          Whatevs, we don’t judge lifestyle choices here.

        3. My lawyer told me not to cooperate. Yours?

    2. “He was polite, so it’s okay that he was also a total authoritarian fuckhead.”

      Fuck off Tulpa.

      1. I don’t know if he is authoritarian at heart. But he was not “bullying” anybody.

        1. If you’ve invoked a wiretapping law that is clearly immoral and authoritarian, then so the fuck are you.

    3. It’s almost as if his car was in a park, spinning around and firing a machine gun.




    4. *Sniff, sniff, sniff*

      I smells me sum Tulpa!

    5. Tulpa, you diseased weasel fucker, why do you even bother changing your handle? You were made by at least 4 people from your very first post.

      You are a mendacious cunt, but you’re not even very good at that.

  20. I think I figured it out. I’ve had both bouncers and cabbies tell me that their coworkers are often cops who are looking for some extra cash or looking to make money while suspended. I’m thinking that the bouncer was a cop, either suspended or off-duty, who had cop friends driving cabs. He then calls his cop buddies who are sympathetic to everyone except the driver, and go and get a warrant for the driver’s arrest. That makes the most sense.

    1. Up above there is an interesting (though unproven) explanation for why so many cops/ex-cops/friends and families of cops are bouncers. Why would that be so for cabbies?

      1. Driving. Cops drive a lot and need to know the area. So do cabbies.

      2. Cops are used to their car being their office and spending most of their day in it. Same with cabbies.

        1. Makes sense.

          1. The difference between a cabbie and a cop is that cabbies don’t beat the shit out of their customers before driving them to someplace they don’t want to go.

    2. See my comment above. your point re: cabbies is equally valid, though i don’t know “new hampshire” to save my life, though its probably even more-true there.

      (*one spent a week in North Conway at climbing school; once skied Tuckerman’s Ravine just so i could say i did)

      1. I saw your comment. I thought I was adding to your point.

        1. yes yes, sorry.

          in any case, i think the theory is pretty valid in general. I’ve met a wide variety of people in certain “part time” jobs in NYC that turned out to be off-duty cops (or ‘retired’ cops). Supplementing income is both needed, allowed (in most places), and in some cases is part of the ‘you do me a favor, i (or people i know) do you a favor’-shadow-economy that is somewhere in between ‘politics/unions’ and ‘the actual mafia’.

  21. Rosa should’ve been more polite.

  22. How ’bout some real Fed Gov action here?

    The Pacific Ocean beach in SF is part of the Nat’l Park system. It is a commons, so it’s treated that way. But most folks do OK, and toss their trash in the cans. But the Park Service doesn’t empty the trash often enough, so the cans overflow.
    Now, as the Park Service, you have some options, like more cans or more service, or, REMOVE THE CANS ENTIRELY!
    Yes, folks, the Park Service is now hoping people will load their trash in their cars and take it home with them. I’m betting there will be many small piles of trash on the beach, or maybe a few large ones.

    1. “We are considering consolidating so we can get more trash into the container,” she said. “It really is a process. We are going to try things and be creative and innovative and ultimately make the beach a safer and cleaner place.”

      Yes! That is exactly how I felt when I rented a 20-yard dumpster. The muses and I danced into the terminal docking Agile Cyborg’s cosmic cockship.

      1. ultimately make the beach a safer and cleaner place.

        The muses and I danced into the terminal docking Agile Cyborg’s cosmic cockship.

        Safer and cleaner place… for cock missiles from breastopolis.

        You there agile? It’s me, Gin.

        1. Look man, I was goddamn Picasso filling that box up. Finding a container with sufficient volume for the waste I had to dispose was the GREATEST ARTISTIC ACHIEVEMENT OF MY LIFE!

          1. *greatest artistic, technical, and spiritual achievement of any sentient being to exist in this universe so far

    2. They notoriously tried this out somewhere in Brooklyn a couple years ago. In this case, the overflowing trash bins were blamed on adjacent businesses cheating on their commercial pickup fees – which does happen everywhere and it is a valid complaint but why fuck over the public who will resort to tossing their garbage in the street (more often)?

      In any event, this didn’t spread to my neighborhood so I’m guessing the results were not what they wanted.

    3. Isn’t this trying to re-enact the disaster of the gay-pride parade in san fran where they wrecked that park…?

      there was a story (last year? or over the summer) about how a park in san fran had the cans removed and replaced with “recycling only” because of some similar cockamamie idea… and it resulted in an open landfill

      here’s the story

      “While party and picnic trash are an ongoing problem at Dolores Park, neighbors say the mess was especially huge over Pride weekend.

      The Pride partying was confined to the Mission District park’s north side ? which opened earlier this month after a $20 million renovation ? as the south side is fenced off and under construction. Over the weekend, the newly planted fresh grass was trampled by tens of thousands of people who left behind everything from plastic plates and wine bottles to Styrofoam coolers and threadbare living-room couches.

      Dolores Heights resident Fred Lewis, who drove by the park on Sunday morning, said, “It looked like a giant garbage heap …”

      The new park doesn’t have traditional trash cans, only recycling stations. After the north-side renovation, Rec and Park is encouraging people to pack out their own trash, but some park-goers prefer to let others clean up their mess.

      They dropped (*@$ $20million into renovating the park…. but they can’t provide *TRASH CANS*

      1. That was a city gov fuck-up; there is no lack of stupidity in the city gov.
        The difference is that this is a fed gov fuck-up; there is no lack of stupidity in the fed gov.
        See how those are different?

  23. Met two Aussies last night in a bar. Both were in their mid 50s and, like all good Boogins, drank like fish. One of them brought up politics (I sure as hell wouldn’t have) and the topic of inflation came up. I put forth that the natural state of a free economy brings deflation as production and management improvements emerge. The spittle flecked response was, “Deflation is fucking terrible! Look what happened in Zimbabwe!”.

    Any parody I could come up with pales in comparison.

    1. deflation… Zimbabwe


      1. You should have heard their ideas on taxation.

    2. They needed to switch to something stronger.

  24. “a busybody bouncer”

    It’s OK to say Bitch. No need for euphemisms.

  25. What the fuck is all this? Asperger Tulpa shows up on a Friday night, and you all give him a reach around?

    1. Rational Argument may not be the prettiest thing out there, but it won’t give as much grief as you grow old with it.

      1. What’s your argument exactly?

        – That the law is just?
        – That recording a conversation you’re part of is an invasion of privacy?
        – That the guy is a douche therefore he has no rights?

        Tulpicality isn’t about taking contrary positions (everyone does that at least once in a while). It’s about getting into an argument without taking a real position (other than “you’re all terrible”).

        1. The law against Uber is stupid. I have already stated that I disagree with it.

          Recording a conversation you’re part of, without consent or knowledge of other parties involved, is an invasion of privacy. Just like video recording of a sex act without the consent or knowledge of your partner is an invasion of privacy. The raw sensory data of what was revealed to you was not intended for another audience. I have already stated this position, several times on this thread.

          Not sure how you could read this thread and think that I did not take a real position.

          1. Recording a conversation you’re part of, without consent or knowledge of other parties involved, is an invasion of privacy.

            If you talked to me, and I wrote down what you said, nobody would ever call that an invasion of privacy. Because you fucking talked to me. There is no argument to be made against recording with electronic devices except ludditism.

            1. A written transcript does not carry the level of evidence that a recording does, since it can much more easily be doubted.

              I think I see the dividing line here. Some here are arguing that a surreptitious recording is fine because all it does is reveal truth. While I can respect that idealistic POV, as a pragmatist I recognize that some truths are better not revealed.

              1. IT’S NOT SURREPTITIOUS!

                What happened to your dedication to facts?

                1. The recording was surreptitious.

                  Read the Seacostonline news article that is linked to. Not the advocacy page.

                  1. You can’t “surreptitiously” participate in a conversation that is being intentionally directed at you.

                    1. The recording was surreptitious.

                    2. Oh, the guy was supposed to chop his fucking ears off too?

                    3. You’ve become tiresome. Sleep well, young prince.

                    4. Arguing something to its logical conclusion does get “tiresome” but I guess that only matters when it’s in your benefit.

              2. Ever hear of a photocopier?

                1. Yes. What I haven’t heard of is how a photocopy of your own writing would be useful in proving what someone else said.

                  1. Hidden surveillance cameras are illegal?

                    1. Not if they don’t record audio. Keep trying.

                    2. Not if they don’t record audio. Keep trying.

                      Your face is not an identifying feature?

                      Jesus Christ do you get stupider every minute.

                  2. There’s this thing called handwriting analysis. Maybe you could crawl out of your own ass and learn about it.

                    1. And sippy cups, salad shooters, solid state drives, etc., all of which have as much to do with this argument as handwriting analysis.

                    2. And sippy cups, salad shooters, solid state drives, etc., all of which have as much to do with this argument as handwriting analysis.

                      Whine some more. You set up the bullshit goalpost of “identifiable” now you have to adhere to it.

        2. Tulpicality isn’t about taking contrary positions (everyone does that at least once in a while). It’s about getting into an argument without taking a real position (other than “you’re all terrible”).

          You want room 12A, next door. This is abuse.

          1. But *this* is room 12A.

  26. What do news reporters do under that statute? “News” doesn’t seem to be among the exceptions, although driving a school bus is!

    TL,DR so don’t know what beef the bouncer had. Was he also a hack?

    1. News media ask for permission (and usually make you sign a consent form) before recording a one-on-one conversation with you.

      1. Yeah, especially when they show up at your home and knock on your door seeking comment.

      2. At the scene of a riot? Fire? Demo? Sports? Any crowd?

        1. If you’re talking about people shouting in the middle of a crowd, that’s not a private conversation.

          Not sure what you mean by “sports”. The players/coaches have all consented to being recorded. I don’t know of any broadcasters who air private conversations among fans in the stands. Fans shouting at people is not a private conversation.

  27. What is this “public” vs “private” conversation bullshit? None of the conversation participants were surreptitious. You can’t violate the “privacy” of someone who’s intentionally talking to you by listening to them.

    1. Is it OK to video your sex with someone without their consent?

      1. sex with someone without their consent

        That’s rape.

        The video, on the other hand, is just a video.

        1. Very clever. But you know what I meant. Is it OK to video your sex with someone, who consented to sex but not to videoing it.

          1. It’s a fucking video, where is the jailable offense?

            1. Invasion of privacy. It is illegal in most jurisdictions.

              1. VIDEO RECORDING = MURDER

              2. Rooster|11.6.15 @ 10:36PM|#
                “Invasion of privacy. It is illegal in most jurisdictions.”

                Was that you a week or so ago claiming un-registered drones lead to murder?

  28. The same fucking place that massages the creepy cocks of the UAE princes running countries rampant with witch/gay/lost library book/blasphemy head removals gets pissy about shit like this?

    Reason can suck my fat cock.

  29. The Koch brothers and the Intercept King and his boy Greenwald don’t like their rags messing with Islam oil barrons do they? Along with that mummy McCain.

    Islam is the last hold out of very nasty fucking goddamn hellacious religions and the p.c. world is fighting hard to stop this horrible shitty thing of the past to grow up. Well, I say FUCK Reason writers for siding with Greenwald on this. Islam needs its Protestants and the modern world has denied the movement this cadre of intellectuals and i fucking wish you goddamn motherfuckers would just fucking step OUT of the WAY and LET Islam get motherfucking castigated like the goddamn Catholics and Protestants and Evangelical Christians and Mormons and all the other motherfucking boombas who love their nasty gods.

    Man, fuck rags that protect archaic violent filthy gods.

  30. Did the bouncer intend to make a general statement of warning to all persons similarly situated to C.David? If so, that was not a private communication, since the bouncer would’ve wanted it publicly known, and should be glad it was publicized.

    1. This is New fuck me up the asshole Hampshire? Like Ohio and Orlando and San Antonio and shitty places on old stretches of New Mexico and starved landscapes in the fucking empty ruler California… people do things that alarm the fucking Iron Kings in the neighborhood. The iron kings are dippy caustic nasty clovers that wield hammers heavy with law that are super ready to smash human joints and the iron kings love their justice partners who love tall desks and peer over them with pretend brows while they mash their private parts against the edges of the pulpit they send people to prison on. No matter. grapes await in the office behind their private mashings.


  32. I was driving down a road today and the sun made everything fucking seem so goddamn normal and the fucking gray beneath the truck in front of me seemed happy but I knew it was dead and unhappy but the light changed and I drove on and felt the everyday of my life turning right and looking behind me and over right and left I felt the humans all around me. not mean humans. Just everyday odd humans wanting to go home and eat dinner and drive home looking at the pretty grass. the girl behind me as I paused at the stop sign seemed remarkably relaxed as if she was shocked at my notice of the vivid grasses and she entered my hallucination for a second and super long second so long that i snapped on beethoven and glanced in the rearview and she looked into my soul eyes and I drove off into the fucking normal fields, man.

  33. I also noticed that this summer is leafless. And that is a damn cool thing, lovely Reason gods and 1.2 goddesses.

    1. all the fucking leaves already fell for me. You need some House Sings the Blues

  34. So like if you punched a hole in the highway and fell into that hole under a rainbow pissing bloody angels. I should think that hole should not be crawled out of. Just fucking call for a pizza and some tennis shoes and venture forth. Fucking job and goddamn family be damned.

      1. what is this caress?

  35. Fuck reflections
    fuck mirrors
    fuck what your thought of who you are
    fuck it
    existence is actually a billion fingers
    playing songs and tunes on the matrix
    of you and me

  36. Fuck reflections
    fuck mirrors
    fuck what your thought of who you are
    fuck it
    existence is actually a billion fingers
    playing songs and tunes on the matrix
    of you and me

  37. I opened a cloud and an angel popped out and sucked my cock and
    I said thank you Mohammed.

  38. I wonder if the writers who spin great font fields for the Koch brothers will edit my shit.

    Can Mohammed of Islam be as cool as the Jesus of Christianity? No fucking way … not a single FUCKING way.

    The Jesus of Christianity is as fake and cuckolded as goddamn fucking Mohammed… BUT all the weirdos associated with that place CNN and Greenwald and THIS site doesn’t want to visit is way FUCKING more tankish and bulletish than

    Pastor Christian Bob down the street who will NEVER FUCKING cut your head off, CNN bitch.

    Why am I presenting this? Because the entire world seems to think that the motherfucking Muslims are demanding FREEDOM and HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTIONS and A NEW MUSLIM SOCIETY THAT FOSTERS LOVE AND PEACE and OCEANS upon OCEANS of fucking laid back society where we don’t cut the heads of gays and margarita drinkers.

    1. fucking reason bitches keep changing their fucking monsters….

      1. Down boy, it’s just your old buddy Gin. Lake Superior/Gordon Lightfoot are always monsters.

        1. Gin can suck my ohio river. Playin with a forest dancer like that, bro. Gordon lightfoot is fuckin demon jizz spilling in my birdie mouth.

          1. So you’re saying you need some Neoconfederate rock right down the throat? Careful, you never come back from Copperhead road

            1. I once fucked a lover that was strong man, caress
              we drank two bottles of whiskey and when he went down I spread
              coke on his ass and sniffed it down like a big man blade and
              my boy sat up under the light of the moon while tall oaks
              scratched the whole evening sky and a coupla bats flown
              round and the light lofty velvet moon shone on his cock and
              he looked in my eyes and i took his cock in my mouth and his flesh
              felt so powerful in my mouth and I licked his head like a goddamn
              motherfucking ninja and my fingers felt his balls burning my knuckles
              and his jizz was crying for Jesus and he shot his motherfucking load over my
              goddamn face and I washed my face off and smoked a blunt and made us
              both a super salad in the middle of morning.

              The gay moon doesn’t faze me.

              1. I’m just going to watch gordon lightfoot on repeat now, thanks.

    2. I blame climate change.

    3. One of my distant relatives (great uncle by marriage) was one of the crew members. The song always makes me cry.

      1. sorry man, Granny, whatevs.

        Gordon makes all of us cry.

  39. Fuck the Town of Dover, and Fuck the Town of Portsmouth.


    Fuck Kittery Maine as well.

    1. I figured Bob was really archer and his second family

        1. no that was an episode.. which was awesome for the “margaritas”… “Is this SOUR MIX?!?”

          1. I like you mister Trans Sober. =D

            1. Fuck you.

              And I like Pyrate Rum.

              1. YARRRR !!!!!!!!!

    2. There is never any parking. The Parking Nazi’s are asshole’s, and now you can’t even get an Uber into downtown Dover, or Portsmouth. What a progressive clusterfuck.

      1. I love how Dover gets a brand new huge multi-level parking deck because reasons, when interestingly Dover itself doesn’t particularly seem to have a major parking problem.

    3. Portsmouth has been kind of extra unbearable between memorial day and labor day for the last 5 years. I know people said the same thing 5 years before that too, but gfs, multi-million dollar condos there and only there? Feh. Pure insanity.

      1. *half-million

      2. It’s a fucking infestation.

    4. Martha Fuller Clark is gonna make everything right. Just you wait and see.

  40. when alleys are lined with angry drunks
    rainbows show up on cloudless nights
    fucking fools trance out with their blunts and rolls
    and the seep songs shine on the poor boys
    while I fucking looked out on my knees

  41. Jesus, even more reach arounds.

    I’m sorry I checked in.

    1. I am creating a cocktail called the “Manhattan Reach Around” In honor of you Playa. =)

    2. My karate teacher when I was a boy was an alley god.
      and his son which I text from toledo this very day is a cop and a really shitty fucking fuck
      that i sort of like but jesus christ man, dude, you are an old man that needs to fucking grow up but you
      can’t because you are a cop.

      cops don’t grow up
      they are tank children
      or General America Butt Naked children

      This is why those ‘millions of perfect human beings’ are super shitty fucks

      No Union that the Left loves is ever wrong.

      So praise the future of this thing called America.

    3. Whenever I see some puke on the platform, I say to my wife as I point at it, “Hey, don’t eat that”.

    4. It’s really hard to resist the impulse. Then I regret it. My apologies.

    5. It is much safer for your faith to simply shun the heretic rather than even discussing the heresy with him.

  42. If you break open a can of the constitution girls run and boys scream.

        1. i guess you think this shit is funny.
          well fuck you, man
          i guess i will remember you some night and post some shit that
          cracks your goddamn forehead open where
          your brains spill into santa’s sweet holidays.

          or you can FUCKING be more friendly

          1. I’m fucking friendly. I love you man.

            Gin:reason as Agile:reason

            You should calm down from all those various activities you might be performing

    1. fact is I eat ass and i also love cocaine and tits and guns so the constitution is great place to cum on. But the motherfucking church bitches and Marxists hate me and I say… suck god cock/

  43. sometimes little pianos
    break into old safes
    and the shelves laugh
    to the free
    and old iron is glad
    for the light cast clouds
    under the adventure mind
    and if these fingers can pierce the dimensions man
    they will and i remember
    sitting for hours in a very cold downtown toledo
    storefront so fucking cold while my sisters played piano
    to beethoven as the snow beat trails on the big windows
    and I sat there gripping my knees looking so sad
    upon the windows piling up with dark snows and while she
    clacked and clinked I hated there. I wanted to die under
    an old cold building while an old strange smelling woman
    pretended her shitty building wasn’t freezing us in downtown toledo.

  44. well so this caress woodchipper bitch decided to be the end all warm skin Tucows and lame james bond swinger fuck
    and this caress woodchipper shit brazen vows of mountains fucking decided he shows up on shit and gets stupor which is the story and the boy falls down a very grassy hill after he was hired by the goddamn cia to kill goats and the cia determined because the goddamn caress is good at killing goats he should be sent on a super secret russian Mission to KILL woodchippers and this he did until the night a good day showed up and the lord blessed him and he
    got super happy on MOON rivers behind russian lines and this Fucking dude fucked a petite russian spy with a ten inch cock with a rainbow all wrapped around it and shit and the fucking missiles smashed into caress arms and pits
    and nose and he sat at a window and read a book next to a river behind a screaming wall of old bricks
    and caress was humbled and agile beamed his shit up into his massive piano spaceship full of drugs and rockers and blondes and little baby comets and robots dripping space honey.

    so fuck caress and his tiny asshole

  45. where is that caress woodchipper bitch?

      1. Out killing goats for the CIA?

  46. Fucking gin is fucking with me. DUDE, I am fucking exploring alleys that have since been decimated, man. Tho, to be sure Gin broke into my goddamn brain.

    Love you brother. wise men say life is a bullet and bullets hit targets before you wake up.

  47. I think I will fall into that very dark stream of dark rainbows breaking my face open and angel tits are banging against my face and I actually feel the stream of gods and their virgins busting their bodies against me and their hips tits and vaginas are drawing blood that streams like cum from me.

    i love you reason and i love your prophets i must go

    1. Granted none of the details is any of my business, all I want is some of that that one is tripping on.

  48. Hey you! Yeah, you. You should be watching The Knick.

  49. What is so special about New Hampshire vis-a-vis freedom?

    1. It is small enough that you don’t have to convince millions of CA ‘free shit’ seekers that they have their heads up their asses.

    2. Generally very good on taxes, guns, and some other staple issues. Government bureaus are somewhat lean, though public spending seems to keep growing. The business profits tax is very high for the region and sucks ass.

      The House of Representatives is extremely large too, as I recall one of the 3 largest such bodies in the world for a State with a population that’s in the 1.5 million person population, so representation can be “better” than average.

      However, this current pants-shitting hysteria about a heroin overdose “crisis” is getting extremely tiresome.

    3. NH was an incredibly stupid choice for the Free State Project. They are still struggling to get up to 20K people “committed” to move there, and even if they get there all of them actually move (unlikely) they’re still dwarfed by the liberal statists overflowing from Massachusetts every year.

      Of course, WY and AK would have been problematic due to the difficulty that immigrants would have finding work there. It was kind of a far-fetched solution all along. Any place with a good economy is going to be flooded with liberals fleeing their dying liberal states.

  50. NH could be Siskiyou County in Northern California. They would likely share much in common.

  51. Oh no, the anarchist ride share drivers, and other free marketeers are so successful!!! People freely choosing a service other than what we say!!!??

    The propaganda that free people, engaging in transactions free from force theft and coercion would lead to chaos is bullshit.

    The folks that benefit from the free market even try to crate terms like “sharing economy” because they’re to scared to admit the free market is successful. It goes against the propaganda they believe in. The fact that they would be unable to control people makes them cringe.

    1. Oh come on. “Sharing economy” is a useful term for something that is distinct from the rest of the market economy.

  52. YouTube maintains its reputation of having a comment sewer.

    Kizone Kaprow 1 hour ago

    How’s that “Free State Project” working out? Good? Cheer up, you have the anarcho-libertarian narcissists at Reason.com on your side — all 23 of them! The only thing missing from their propaganda piece was your puppy being raped and tortured and shot by the Jackbooted Thugs. But they did mention the baby thing. I cried a little. From laughing so hard! Why won’t anyone take libertarians seriously?

    It must be sad to be a pathetic piece of crap without a real hobby.

    1. At least she has something to get up for in the morning. Can the rest of us say that?

      1. Umm… Yeah.

        I have everything I could have ever wanted out of life.

        Kizone has nothing, and it shows.

        1. Say a prayer for the Pretender.

          1. Too close to home? Yeah, yeah it is.

            1. Amazing how you can be so content surrounded by so many “sockpuppets”.

              I am the one hiding under your bed
              Teeth ground sharp and eyes glowing red

              I am the one hiding under your stairs
              Fingers like snakes and spiders in my hair

              I am the clown with the tear-away face
              Here in a flash and gone without a trace

              I am the “who” when you call, “Who’s there?”
              I am the wind blowing through your hair

              I am the shadow on the moon at night
              Filling your dreams to the brim with fright

        2. Hasn’t the name “Todd Gakk” been associated with one of our trolls before? He’s on that YouTube comment thread sucking almost as much cop dick as Tulpa here.

          1. Yeah, he’s running 2 socks in the youtube thread, and at least 1 here.

            It’s not the most pathetic thing I’ve EVER seen, but probably the most pathetic thing this year.

            1. Contentment is knowing that everyone who disagrees with you is really a sockpuppet of one person.

            2. I believe Todd Gakk is distinct from Mary Stack.

              The only explanation that makes sense is that he basically adopted Mary’s delusions and decided to take up her standard when she fell.

              Which, when you contemplate it is even more sad and pathetic. He isn’t even original enough to come up with his own cause.

          2. The only relation this story has to cops is that everyone (including the cops) agrees that recording the cop was legal.

  53. I watched part of Maddow’s Team Blue freak show last night. Here’s a clip of Sanders weighing in on guns:


    Get your gun grabber bingo card handy because he hits every talking point.

    O’Malley was asked whether we should spend money on high speed rail or a mission to mars. His answer was “I reject your false choice; why not both?” I think he may have been joking. He was also asked what was the most useless piece of clothing he owns, which is a kilt.

    I can’t remember anything Clinton said. I was expecting Maddow to start making out with her any second.

    1. Why not high speed rail to Mars?

      1. That’s exactly the kind of bold vision our country needs to carry working families, seniors, and children across the bridge to the 21st century. Not only that, high speed rail to Mars will stimulate the economy by creating millions of good-paying middle class jobs while also lowering the deficit and keeping abortion safe, legal, and rare for our gallant veterans.

        Twirling, twirling towards freedom!

  54. You’ve got to be kidding me. This is the same Christopher David as: http://bit.ly/1NiBNKE

    He also ran for Congress in California in 2012 and 2014 and failed. Here’s a disastrous AMA he did on Reddit:

    I mean, I side with Uber on this and dont agree with Portsmouth’s ridiculous ban, but could we get a better standard bearer than this joke?

  55. It’s unclear that that’s going to hold up: http://tinyurl.com/pj6dkpd

    The New Hampshire Supreme Court has held that a party effectively consented to the recording of a communication when the surrounding circumstances demonstrated that the party knew the communication was being recorded. New Hampshire v. Locke, 761 A.2d 376 (N.H. 1999)

    1. You learned to cut quotes from Reason writers?

      The New Hampshire Supreme Court has held that a party effectively consented to the recording of a communication when the surrounding circumstances demonstrated that the party knew the communication was being recorded. New Hampshire v. Locke, 761 A.2d 376 (N.H. 1999); see also Fischer v. Hooper, 732 A.2d 396 (N.H. 1999) (upholding the sufficiency of an instruction that the jury could consider, under the standard for implied consent, not only a defendant’s words but also her actions in determining whether she consented to the recording of her conversation), superseded by statute on other grounds.

      1. superseded by statute on other grounds.


  56. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $100 per hour. I work through this link

    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, http://www.workbuzz60.com

  57. You didn’t read the law too well. It’s only a misdemeanor if you are a party to the conversation.

  58. This New Hampshire is an early primary state where only the looter socialist party conventions blare forth on National Socialist Volksempf?nger broadcasts. Next they’ll have a law banning all but National Socialist radio/teevee. It’s happened before… in a Christian society…

  59. I make up to $90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $40h to $86h? Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link… Try it, you won’t regret it!……


  60. What a neckbeard! Off with his head!


  61. Mr. Dowd was arrested for violating an uncommonly stupid, but constitutional law. In New Hampshire, “Live Free Or Die” is a hollow aspirational slogan that exists only on our license plates.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.