If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   British man beats off 4 attackers without letting go of his fish and chips   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 33
    More: Spiffy, Cambridgeshire Police, martial arts  
•       •       •

4804 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Feb 2013 at 10:42 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



33 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-12 02:07:49 AM
What a nice guy, beating off his attackers. Did they all take naps afterward?
 
2013-02-12 02:17:51 AM
Maybe he just ran out of tartar sauce and really wanted some more...
 
2013-02-12 03:02:24 AM
That's twisted.
 
2013-02-12 05:50:19 AM
Does he also have an uncle named Jack who happens to own a horse?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-02-12 09:30:42 AM
Well, it only takes one hand to toss off an attacker if he does them one at a time.
 
2013-02-12 10:38:16 AM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-02-12 10:45:45 AM
The UK. They ban guns, they ban knives, then you get attacked by people with screwdrivers. Next they'll be banning screwdrivers.
 
2013-02-12 10:45:56 AM
In a row?
 
hej
2013-02-12 10:46:45 AM
Huzzah for handjob jokes.
 
2013-02-12 10:47:52 AM
It might have been quicker if he had used both hands though...
 
2013-02-12 10:47:54 AM
Try not to tug any more cocks on your way through the parking lot!
 
2013-02-12 10:48:03 AM
NTTAWWT
 
2013-02-12 10:48:36 AM
This headline was pretty gay.
 
2013-02-12 10:56:22 AM
He's British... do you really want a BJ from those horror show for teeth?
 
2013-02-12 10:57:09 AM

FullMetalPanda: He's British... do you really want a BJ from those horror show for teeth?

 
2013-02-12 10:59:18 AM

Ass_Master_Flash: What a nice guy, beating off his attackers. Did they all take naps afterward?


came for this...now I can leave satisfied!
 
2013-02-12 11:07:26 AM
Me too!
 
2013-02-12 11:11:42 AM
Total bullshiate. The girlfriend stabbed him.
 
2013-02-12 11:22:21 AM
Karate, they apparently got what they wanted.
 
2013-02-12 11:51:40 AM

bluenovaman: Karate, they apparently got what they wanted.


i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-02-12 11:53:08 AM

spudvol: Total bullshiate. The girlfriend stabbed him.


Agreed. Why wouldn't the guy call the police immediately after the attempted robbery? The "I was attacked" story is a cover to hide a domestic dispute.
 
2013-02-12 11:55:49 AM

msticaries79: Ass_Master_Flash: What a nice guy, beating off his attackers. Did they all take naps afterward?

came for this...now I can leave satisfied!


Boy, youre a quick finisher
 
2013-02-12 11:57:49 AM

Walker: They ban guns


Wrong.
 
2013-02-12 12:16:43 PM
+1 to subby for deliberately leaving the door open.
 
2013-02-12 12:22:10 PM
i29.photobucket.com
 
2013-02-12 03:00:33 PM
So they were all battered...
 
2013-02-12 03:03:33 PM

thepeterd: So they were all battered...


Beats eating them plain.
 
2013-02-12 04:00:11 PM
"Beats off 4 attackers"

At the same time?
 
2013-02-12 04:03:51 PM

Walker: The UK. They ban guns, they ban knives, then you get attacked by people with screwdrivers. Next they'll be banning screwdrivers.


Actually, no they don't. They require you justify owning a firearm, and heavily restrict certain types - like handguns - to people with a legitimate need to own them.
 
2013-02-12 05:03:11 PM
Is "holding his fish and chips" some kind of British euphemism? Because its making me giggle.

/I may look 40, but really I'm 12
 
2013-02-12 06:41:57 PM

BronyMedic: legitimate need


Oh, Christ, here we go again. Legitimate need? We don't legitimately need most of what we have. You "need" food, water, and air. That's it. That's all. Nothing else. So I suppose that is all you should be allowed, since it's all you have a "legitimate need" for.
 
2013-02-12 11:25:03 PM

untaken_name: Oh, Christ, here we go again. Legitimate need? We don't legitimately need most of what we have. You "need" food, water, and air. That's it. That's all. Nothing else. So I suppose that is all you should be allowed, since it's all you have a "legitimate need" for.


Wut?  How does the argument that for you to own/posses certain specific things you must show a legitimate need, in anyway imply that you should ONLY own things that you can show a legitimate need?
 
2013-02-14 12:32:12 PM

untaken_name: BronyMedic: legitimate need

Oh, Christ, here we go again. Legitimate need? We don't legitimately need most of what we have. You "need" food, water, and air. That's it. That's all. Nothing else. So I suppose that is all you should be allowed, since it's all you have a "legitimate need" for.


It was an unfortunate choice of words, not the basis for the UK's legislation.  Calm down.  I believe the point was that they simply regulate it, via the police and a comprehensive licensing process.  I suppose if a Hackney resident requested a firearms licence in order to buy a .223 and didn't have a gun safe or access to any land on which to shoot it it could be considered that they didn't have a legitimate REASON to own that gun in a city and that allowing them to could constitute a risk, but the process does not look at NEED.
 
Displayed 33 of 33 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report