Stupid shit you see on Facebook


Twitter is close enough, right? I’m not sure that flagpole is street-legal either.


Hopefully he goes under a bridge soon, you know the ones with posted signs that haven’t changed after they paved over it a few times.


If we’re lucky maybe the bridge will just collapse on him.


I’m guessing this image is from 90s, when sodomy was made legal?




Ah 2003. I thought that case happened in 1999, I was four years off.

But anyway, yeah, I thought that’s when people would have been mad about the issue. Back in 2003.


Iowa Secretary of State puts out a “Make sure and go vote, that’s what the soldiers risk their lives for,” thing.

Dude literally responds with:
“So they can track you,I don’t think so”

He’s on fucking Facebook. And has a motorcycle apparently. Yeah, the government will never figure out where you are by your vehicle registration.

To freak him out I looked at his pictures and deduced where he lived in about 2 minutes. I didn’t dox him or anything insane, but I pointed out this fact. It’s insane that someone with a public Facebook profile that mentions very specific places is worried the government is going to find him.

Also he has like tons of anti-Trump shit on his feed. But you know, he’s not gonna VOTE that’s crazy talk.


Convince him to be a Trump supporter. Then it would be a good thing.

n-dimensional chess!


Black Republican friend strikes again.

BRF: “Trump is 100% Racist”
BRF: “Don’t vote for the Democrats, what have they done for you?”
BRF: “I wish we could all get along.”

15 minute time span.


This is why I don’t associate with friends.


Local woman arrested for attempted murder (huge news for a town of 7k people). Local PD puts out public notice on Facebook (as they tend to do for any major crimes or arrests). Dude, presumably a friend or family, chimes in with:

what gives you the right to blast this information on facebook, you should be invesigated for violation of her civil rights.

Yes, it’s a violation of civil rights to publicly acknowledge public information. Also apparently he loves secret trials. You know the government should just arrest people, not say anything about it. That’ll work out fine.

“Whatever happened to Jeff anyway?”

“Police took him in the night, never saw him again.”

“Oh, that seems fine.”


Not being on Facebook (and not planning to at any time in the future) I was unaware the police reported arrests there. I suppose they are no different than any other business now that blows their own horn on Facebook.


They don’t report everything, but big things like drug busts and the like tend to make it.

I mean it’s in the local paper. Heck it’s in basically every paper in the state. It’s basically a press release by them.


Yeah, pet much every police department in America reports crime and arrests to the local paper.

This is also the source of the absolutely amazing “police reports illustrated”.


Dude must like Trump cause he’s tripling down.

Innocent until proven guilty, the Presumption of innocence follows the 5th, 6th and 14th of the U.S. Constitution of persons accused of crimes.

You heard it hear folks, the Constitution prevents even being accused of a crime. Law doesn’t exist, rob banks, if they arrest you for it, sue them for violation of your civil rights.*

  • I am not a lawyer and don’t actually do this you’ll be in prison for a long time


I know they release the info, that is no surprise. Drug busts and arrests are common in the paper. I just had no idea the local PD did all that on Facebook.


They do a lot of announcement stuff there.

If a road is going to be closed, if there is an emergency situation/weather warning, etc, etc.
It’s a decent system since it reaches a lot of people instantly these days.

Usually it’s stuff like “Road X is closed because of a fallen tree” or the like, but anytime there is a drug bust or the like they use it to toot their own horns about it. Usually it’s thanking some person or organization for cookies.


No idea how you read this from what you quoted, it just sounds like he’s trying to prevent trial by social media. Maybe there’s more to it though, since the earlier quote you had did sound silly.


No, he literally said the police department acknowledging an arrest is a violation of her civil rights.
That was the follow up when I said that isn’t the case and cited him law that says arrests legally have to be part of the public record.

He’s equating social media with an actual court of law. Saying that even mentioning someone is arrested presumes their guilt. Then he cited Amendments as if they are even a factor.


If you have the law on your side, argue the law; if you have the facts, argue the facts; if you have neither, pound the table.