💪 Tough Guys Dalton Levi Eatherly / Chud the Builder / ChudTheBuilder - Putting the hard r in retard. IRL streamer who provokes confrontations with Tennessee blacks and shot a guy while streaming.

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Free Chud?

  • Free him, he a good boy who dindu nuffin

    Votes: 43 42.2%

  • Enjoy prison, Chud

    Votes: 59 57.8%
  • Total voters
    102
Sneed on Cloud 9 said:
TLDW: Chud the Builder is fucked. If there is a trial, it will be comprised of normies who do not consider Chud's behavior based.
Click to expand...
This describes America being fucked because retards think saying mean words is "based" behavior for edgy teens and not a right we must fight hard to protect.

@Potentially Criminal

Why do you hold Chud to a different standard than the feral blacks assaulting him? The one he maced was in his personal space, saying something about being in Chud's mama's pussy. Why are we not considering them two grown men equally using their right to speak freely without someone else justifiably assaulting them in this scenario? I don't think Chud should've been able to mace him for saying that, even if I find it distasteful and annoying.

The black slaps Chud's hat off his head, which in my area is an extension of his body. It'd likely be 4th degree assault, giving Chud the legal right to pull out his mace in preparation for another assault, if not mace him immediately. Since the black walked off, I don't think macing him would be appropriate/legal then since it indicates de-escalation or an end to the confrontation, but I'm obviously allowed to prepare myself for another assault. I'm sure I'm also allowed to continue existing in public without a duty to retreat due to some faggot assaulting me.

In how many jurisdictions is it considered brandishing when someone assaults you and you prepare yourself to defend against a second attack? Where are you located where "touch me again!" is "provoking" or some leftoid term and not a lawful conditional threat that sets the boundary at, "If you assault me again, I am prepared to defend myself?"

Why is the onus on Chud to essentially remove himself from society so low-impulse retards can't wantonly assault him and attempt to disarm his lawful tools for self-defense? It just seems like every single point of opposition to Chud is basically, "Dude, we all know blacks are unhinged and violent. Therefore, we need different rules/expectations for us in society where whites are held to a higher standard than retarded blacks."

You know, the whole issue Chud is highlighting.
 
Last edited:
DeMarcus Fenix of O-Block said:
"Fighting words" are misunderstood. It has never been a greenlight for niggers to assault racists. It isn't a relevant doctrine in self-defense cases. There isn't any precedent of a violent nigger gets acquitted on the basis of being called a nigger (some killers have been convicted of manslaughter, but the circumstances were pretty muddy to begin with). Much to the chagrin of BLM & associates they go to prison all the time for battering or killing Crakkka ass racists. Kiwis have this idea that niggers never go to jail for all the crime they commit which is so laughably retarded
Click to expand...
Exactly this. It's a mitigating factor.
Twix Eatr said:
This describes America being fucked because retards think saying mean words is "based" behavior for edgy teens and not a right we must fight hard to protect.

@Potentially Criminal

Why do you hold Chud to a different standard than the feral blacks assaulting him? The one he maced was in his personal space, saying something about being in Chud's mama's pussy. Why are we not considering them two grown men equally using their right to speak freely without someone else justifiably assaulting them in this scenario?

The black slaps Chud's hat off his head, which in my area is an extension of his body. It'd likely be 4th degree assault, giving Chud the legal right to pull out his mace in preparation for another assault. In how many jurisdictions is it considered brandishing when someone assaults you and you prepare yourself to defend against a second attack?
Click to expand...
He ran away and Chud followed him, retard. Lmfao.
 
Sirfaggot said:
He ran away and Chud followed him, retard. Lmfao.
Click to expand...
He assaulted Chud in public and ran off like a coward. Somehow, this doesn't cross into, "He got what he wanted" when Chud finally maces him in self-defense. Chud continued existing in public after the assault. Victims of an attack are not required to no leave public spaces after their victimization. We require those who assault others be penalized.

When the violent retard attempted to disarm the victim after the first assault, the victim lawfully sprayed his attacker with mace. Imagine thinking someone assaulting you and running away is a threshold for no longer having the right to self-defense or move freely. It should be legal to chase down and empty the can in his eyeballs.

Again, it's just nonstop female-coded talking points here. Women appease their attackers because they're women. To them, daring to not back down when someone assaults you is insane. Only in the America where women in positions of power have turned us into the Twilight Zone do we demand assault victims cede public space to their attackers.
Flaming Insignias said:
Anybody claiming they have a right to scream slurs at niggers and shoot them for retaliating is in truth little better than a nigger themselves.
Click to expand...
They are not retaliating against anything! You need to uninstall whatever leftoid "words are violence" propaganda has infected your brain immediately.
Alphasnail said:
From what im reading on "fighting words" as applied in court,
Click to expand...
The entirety of the concept of "fighting words" is a massive hole that attacks our fundamental rights. It needs to be abolished entirely as it allows violent retards to slide the bar for acceptable behavior. Anything tied to race and what the "average person" would do in a scenario is basically an anti-white ruling. We are letting feral monsters set the bar for what constitutes the right to murder people over their low-impulse feelings.

Society will tell white people that there's no equivalent to nigger for white people. Yeah, you know why? Because whites aren't violent, low-impulse, double-digit IQ retards with a less-developed PFC. So whites will continue to abide by laws and not chimp out over rights that only white men could/did build for us. And the few that do get to go to jail because the bulk of us still understand that's not acceptable. Meanwhile, the worst offenders in our society will be granted the freedom to murder whites because they're simply too stupid and worthless to understand or assimilate to our most sacred American rights.

If only leftoids who say "lmfao ok ya our biggest 'right' is shouting nigger in the street" were the ones getting murdered by chimpouts, that'd be one thing. But heaven, this place is not.

Anybody using the terms "instigated", "retaliated", "provoked" or similar should immediately be deported to Africa. These terms cannot apply to something as fundamentally American as offending someone with your thoughts. This is the divide. If whites aren't willing to die on that hill, we'll continue getting murdered on it. It's that simple.
 
Last edited:
DeMarcus Fenix of O-Block said:
Fighting words" are misunderstood. It has never been a greenlight for niggers to assault racists.
Click to expand...
From what im reading on "fighting words" as applied in court, it can be a high bar to meet, but it's contingent on all of the circumstances. I haven't watched the incident so im not gonna assert anything factual about it, but as for fighting words, what we're looking at is whether what he said was yelled in close proximity in a threatening manner or combined with a physical posture or presentation of a weapon in a manner that the court would determine could cause an "ordinary person" (this means if you were in their shoes not whether the nigger chimped out) could believe they were in danger. Also so.e of chuds online postings, could POSSIBLY be construed as a kind of premeditation for murder. Niggers and touchy subjects aside, there is a precedent for locking up guys who carry around a gun and instigate fights while armed because they keep telling people that theyre gonna shoot someone if they give them shit. Whether chud is a serial instigator who fantisizes about being Paul kersey ill leave to the thread to bitch over endlessly but these are some things that will be in contention. As for our dear beloved wignats, what you fail continually to understand about black and minority tribalism as a strategy is it is only effective, or just not a complete deleterious failstate because it was preceded by the tacit consent of power. Whites in the south used the same approach right up until the bayonet were pointed at them and it did fuck all. Saul alinsky tactics only worked because power already gave it the green light. This was hashed out on firing line by a gay catholic in like the late 60s.
 
I find it interesting that when I check the thread in the morning there’s a majority of pro-Chud posts, but when I check the thread in the afternoon it’s all nigger love. Do the nigger lovers not have jobs, or are they posting on Tel Aviv time?
 
RuPaul’s Drag Racist said:
Nobody can trick you into assaulting them you fucking ape
Click to expand...
if you were a low impulse low IQ individual you could certainly be provoked into doing so, not that it would justify assault but i don't think a jury is going to look favorable on you if the assault was precipitated by you saying the most heinous shit imaginable in what can be reasonably construed as you trying to egg someone on to do something stupid.
 
gay said:
saying the most heinous shit imaginable
Click to expand...
Ranking nigger as the most heinous thing you could say is hilarious :story:

I rank niggers as the most heinous creatures to ever exist.
Mison-Sere-Ugly-AP-468683823083-3345344455.jpg
 
Twix Eatr said:
Why is the onus on Chud to essentially remove himself from society so low-impulse retards can't wantonly assault him and attempt to disarm his lawful tools for self-defense? It just seems like every single point of opposition to Chud is basically, "Dude, we all know blacks are unhinged and violent. Therefore, we need different rules/expectations for us in society where whites are held to a higher standard than retarded blacks."
Click to expand...
gay said:
if you were a low impulse low IQ individual you could certainly be provoked into doing so, not that it would justify assault but i don't think a jury is going to look favorable on you if the assault was precipitated by you saying the most heinous shit imaginable in what can be reasonably construed as you trying to egg someone on to do something stupid.
Click to expand...
 
Twix Eatr said:
He assaulted Chud in public and ran off like a coward. Somehow, this doesn't cross into, "He got what he wanted" when Chud finally maces him in self-defense.
Click to expand...
"Assaulted", yeah, on a technicality that would likely elicit eye-rolls from the police officers on the receiving end of such a report. You think the fact that it's under the same wide-spanning legal umbrella of "assault" as actual beatdowns means the legal system would perceive the hat slap in a remotely similar light? They wouldn't. And they shouldn't. Because that's fucking stupid. And how is it self-defense when he's no longer attacking you??? lmfao.

Twix Eatr said:
When the violent retard attempted to disarm the victim after the first assault, the victim lawfully sprayed his attacker with mace. Imagine thinking someone assaulting you and running away is a threshold for no longer having the right to self-defense or move freely. It should be legal to chase down and empty the can in his eyeballs.
Click to expand...
He was running away, so no, it was not lawful. Do you think self-defense and revenge are the same thing? What the fuck?

Twix Eatr said:
Again, it's just nonstop female-coded talking points here.
Click to expand...
You're just a bunch of effeminate eunuchs for... *looks at paper* not feeling threatened enough by a nigger's back to spray it with mace!
 
Homeboy Bob Proctor said:

View attachment 9025260

So this account is claiming that chud is calling adin ross to post bail because he cant access his gosendgo account with out the phone the cops took and he will fight for free in brand risk if adin helps

The account also has other messages from chud and a link to a new givesendgo

Either someone is scamming retards to send money or chud is crying to adin ross.
Click to expand...
IMG_7104.jpeg

ADIN ROSS? Hahahahhahahahaha.

gay said:
i'm not talking about yelling nigger, think walking up to a family and telling a dad you hope his kids get raped and killed or something. eventually you'll find someone whose gonna snap.
Click to expand...

They act like there aren’t entire fucking communties/channels/etc….

Dedicated to white tweakers and Methheads beating the fuck out of each other in the backwoods of Arkansas

Just like that dude earlier in the thread was saying.

YOU ANIT NEVER LIVED AROUND WIGGERS
 
Twix Eatr said:
Why do you hold Chud to a different standard than the feral blacks assaulting him?
Click to expand...

He isn't. If you'd paid attention to the clip he lays out pretty clearly what standard he's holding Chud to with Chaplinsky. Chud is deliberately using probably the only thing that is guaranteed to provoke a fight. When you start engaging in provocation, your ability to justify self-defense as a legal argument becomes far more difficult. When you couple this with his many tweets that can be construed as him actively seeking to shoot and kill a black person in a pre-meditated self-defense scenario, it sounds like he was looking to kill someone.

Twix Eatr said:
It'd likely be 4th degree assault, giving Chud the legal right to pull out his mace in preparation for another assault, if not mace him immediately.
Click to expand...

Which is a reasonable escalation of force.

Twix Eatr said:
In how many jurisdictions is it considered brandishing when someone assaults you and you prepare yourself to defend against a second attack?
Click to expand...

In a lot of them if the escalation of force isn't viewed as proportionate or you don't meet other criterion surrounding handling a firearm in a self-defense situation. It's one thing if you brandish a firearm in self-defense if someone is trying to come at you with a knife or other weapon, or if you have a reasonable fear. For example, if someone were to pull a realistic enough imitation firearm on you, you may be within your rights to pull a firearm. It totally depends on the situation, and the item being brandished in defense of a second attack. Firearms are viewed as an immediate escalation to lethal force and for very good reason. If you are viewed as escalating to lethal force, you are going to have a difficult time claiming self-defense.

Twix Eatr said:
Why is the onus on Chud to essentially remove himself from society so low-impulse retards can't wantonly assault him and attempt to disarm his lawful tools for self-defense?
Click to expand...

Chud doesn't have to remove himself from society. He can do what everyone else does in polite society and contain himself and go on about his day like a normal person. It is not hard to not act like a degenerate, and it's even less difficult to not constantly record yourself being a degenerate. Nobody made ChudtheBuilder walk around screaming nigger at Black people, nobody made him record himself doing it over and over again, and nobody made him make tweet after tweet painting every angle to claim self-defense look less and less like self-defense, and more like attempted 2nd Degree Murder. I cannot fathom how you come to this conclusion.
 
anon101x said:
They act like there aren’t entire fucking communties/channels/etc….

Dedicated to white tweakers and Methheads beating the fuck out of each other in the backwoods of Arkansas

Just like that dude earlier in the thread was saying.

YOU ANIT NEVER LIVED AROUND WIGGERS
Click to expand...
Billy Bobs are just as retarded as any nigger. Chud fits the bill. Violent, crude, has his baby mommas, and shouldn't be in polite society.
 
Leland Palmer said:
Chud doesn't have to remove himself from society. He can do what everyone else does in polite society and contain himself and go on about his day like a normal person
Click to expand...

long, logical reasonable post literally hand holding them on your reasoning and why it’s a bad idea to support nuisance streamers causing problems and how the court will likely deal with this

His easy marks that he begs donos from:

SOMETHING SOMETHING U WERE BORN WHITE THATS YOUR TEAM COLORRRRRRR

The absolute state of chud defenders at the moment.
 
DeMarcus Fenix of O-Block said:
"Fighting words" are misunderstood. It has never been a greenlight for niggers to assault racists. It isn't a relevant doctrine in self-defense cases. There isn't any precedent of a violent nigger gets acquitted on the basis of being called a nigger (some killers have been convicted of manslaughter, but the circumstances were pretty muddy to begin with). Much to the chagrin of BLM & associates they go to prison all the time for battering or killing Crakkka ass racists. Kiwis have this idea that niggers never go to jail for all the crime they commit which is so laughably retarded
Click to expand...

It actually is a relevant doctrine in self defense, it's actually written into the code of Tennessee that you can't provoke a confrontation and then claim "self defense", specifically to prevent what Chud was trying to accomplish which is endlessly bait people into phsyical confrontations and then ultimately shoot them as a form of legalized murder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom