The irony of Keri L (@ikeriover)

After retweeting this post of mine Keri L (@ikeriover) tweeted this:


My post pointed out she was either incapable of comprehensive reading or that she was imagining I wrote something completely different from what I actually did. And she calls me crazy?

Another thread of interest is this:

you can get prosecuted for leaving your children in the car alone, but not if you leave a loaded gun for them to find? #NotOneMore

— Keri L (@ikeriover) June 7, 2014

@ikeriover Not true in most states. Reckless endangerment laws exist and are used.

— Joe Huffman (@JoeHuffman) June 7, 2014

@JoeHuffman actually this is a true story.

— Keri L (@ikeriover) June 7, 2014

@JoeHuffman you are a bully & not so surprising with your crazy pro-gun stance. I am sure you ‘quote me” &yourcrazy followers will join in.

— Keri L (@ikeriover) June 7, 2014

@ikeriover I was referring to the part about not being prosecutable for leaving a loaded gun accessible to kids.

— Joe Huffman (@JoeHuffman) June 7, 2014

As part of this same thread she also said, “You are a monster.” But that tweet has been deleted.

These people have mental problems. There is no other explanation.

Update for clarification: In the comments there is some confusion about who said what which led to the confrontation between Keri L. and I. Here is more of the thread:



22 thoughts on “The irony of Keri L (@ikeriover)

  1. I’m going to help her here because you guys are just going to gang up on her. Regarding your tweet “Citations needed for the libelous claims that I am a bully or crazy.” You are going to have to learn the definition of libel. She posted nothing libelous. “Bully” and “crazy” are opinions protected by the First Amendment.

    You (or someone) posted “I own guns to kill people with guns.” Isn’t this like the Jeopardy question: “What might someone planning to commit suicide say?”

    • You or someone? Can’t even narrow down if it was Joe?

      Also given that Conceal Carry is legal in all 50 states… why do you *think* people carry guns?

      • Self defense. For example, look at the Trayvon Martin case? Did Trayvon have a gun? Nope.

        • Slamming someone’s skull against the ground can kill. No gun required.

          Why do you fanatics defend the guy established by the facts and trial to have been the aggressor? This bizarre impulse is another reason people don’t trust the gun-grabbers — you’re not against violence, you just have a peculiar list of people you want using it, starting with criminals!

          • Ann Coulter once remarked that liberals have a perverse fascination with toying with people’s lives. She cites the tendency of liberals to push for ‘clemency’ for people who really, really do not need to be out wandering around.

            Sometimes libs need to be reminded this is not a game of ‘The Sims’ where you can reload a save after your idiot Sims burn the house down.

    • ‘Gang up on’ is not the same as ‘repeatedly bludgeon with logic’.

    • “Gang up on her”?

      If anti-rights advocates do not like how pro-rights activists defend Americans’ rights, perhaps the former should stop attacking those rights?

  2. Gotta love the wounded-fawn.

    You’re a monster and a bully, but Keri’s free to makeup and say anything

    • I wouldn’t call Joe a bully but some of the pro-gun advocates are. On the flip side, I’ve seen a few aggressive anti’s too.

      It’s one thing to be willing to talk about things. It’s a totally different thing to thnk that you have to shout the other side down. That, to me, defines a bully.

      • All you fanatics are aggressive. If you weren’t, you wouldn’t care if others had the means to defend themselves.

  3. Ah yes, the ever popular(among the bog stupid anyhow) poor, innocent, trayvon meme. That’s stupid even for your usually inane blather, ubu52.

      • What’s stupid or dishonest? Trayvon didn’t have a gun. It’s a lie to say that he did. When someone says “I carry a gun to shoot people with guns” the class of “people with guns” would not include Trayvon because Trayvon didn’t have a gun. Does this logic somehow evade both of you?

        • I cannot speak for what the person saying “own guns to shoot people with guns” was thinking at the time (and you don’t have a screen shot either as proof), however, getting ground-pounded by someone bigger than you is justification for deadly force.

          Unless you think that suffering intracranial hemorrhage or disabling chronic headaches/seizure disorders is an acceptable quality of life as a trade for not defending yourself to the fullest extent.

          • Why can’t you stick to the topic? The person posted “I own guns to shoot people with guns.” They didn’t say they owned guns for self defense or anything else. It’s either in Joe’s twitter feed or Keri’s twitter feed.

          • ubu52, You believe what Keri L. said. What I said was “No one that I know believes it is OK to harm innocent children. Defense of innocent life is why I own guns.”

            See the update to the post with the screen shot of the entire thread. Or read the thread for yourself with the provided link.

            I agree I was a little out of line to say she was libelous. But she is nuts.

        • Your continued citation of an unsourced quite is amusing. You’re demanding we defend a position none of us took.

          The only person responsible for the position taken in that quote is the original author. If there is one.

  4. People attempting to violate basic human rights as a matter of national policy are kind, thoughtful virtuous and compassionate. Those attempting to defend and protect basic rights are cruel, stupid, vile, and dangerous. Don’t you all get it yet by now? Golly.

    What’s the point in trying to alter the laws of emotional physics?

  5. Joe; you are a blasphemer, an infidel, which makes you a terrible person. Anything you say or do in an attempt to convince a Believer otherwise is therefore obviously a ruse and must be put down as such. It is impossible to start the conversation by insulting their God (government power and authority) and expect thereafter to win someone’s favor. A True Believer is unshakable (until the government boot is on their ass) and so once you’ve identified on, move on. We’ll never be able to get every American on the life boat, nor do we need to. Best may be to find all the Americans, where ever in the world they may live.

    • The Believers will not stop believing even with the Boot on them. A common phrase in the gulag was “if Stalin only knew!”

      • Valid point. There are some True Believers with unshakable faith (in the coercive power of government) and The One who occupies the top position in the chain of command (of bullies and cowards). Hopefully they’re a small minority. We’ll see.

Comments are closed.