**Stunt 904**
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,259
From: N/A
Re: **Stunt 904**
It's not about "where" to put the lo-jack... it's about how you mount it. If I put lo-jack on my bike, I'm going to weld a box in my trunk to the subframe that is sealed with the lo-jack device in it. 
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,994
From: BFE, MD
Re: **Stunt 904**
you posted normal ****? no you posted some nut huggery of some ******* lowlifes. youre a ******* punk and if i knew you i would stomp a mud hole in your *** then turn you out to the brothas on the yard. id change your name to snow white and sell you for a couple packs of rip and some coffee.
this is the same **** who was talking **** in Ryan S's esss thread.
M@SS MAYHEM
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,164
From: Mayhem County, MA
Re: **Stunt 904**
If you get it that cheap, that's great. I'm going off of the first year I owned a new bike, which was '97. Couldn't find full coverage ANYWHERE for less than $2800 a year. Had a spotless record then, too. Anyways, we're getting off topic......do what you gotta do, bro. You're not too bothered by thieves, and I hate 'em. No biggie.
So what would that mean? People with **** records would pay $5k A year on A bike?? NO ******* WAY! I'm calling shenanigans on that post!!! LOL.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 560
From: ATL
Re: **Stunt 904**
EXTREME THERAPY
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,343
From: DURTY MACONGA
Re: **Stunt 904**
Generally, the “castle doctrine” provides that someone attacked in his home can use reasonable force, which can include deadly force, to protect his or another's life without any duty to retreat from the attacker.
3. Some states add a legal presumption about when a person is justified in using force against intruders. For example, Florida added a presumption that a person using force had a reasonable fear of death or serious injury to himself or another if (a) the person against whom he used force was illegally and forcefully entering a dwelling or occupied vehicle, was in the process of doing so, or removed or was attempting to remove a person against his will and (b) the person using force knew or had reason to believe this was occurring. These presumptions, which vary by state, have exceptions and do not apply under specified circumstances, such as when (a) the person force is used against had a right to be in the dwelling or was a lawful resident, (b) the person using force was engaged in illegal activity, or (c) the person force is used against is a law enforcement officer performing his duties who identified himself or the person using force knew or should have known the person was an officer.
When defending property, deadly force may be used only when it is necessary to defend a person from the use or imminent use of deadly physical force or infliction or imminent infliction of great bodily harm as described above (CGS § 53a-21).
for those of you that dont undastand this **** ....It says you can only kill a muthafucka ,if that ***** is tryin to kill you .........not because he is trying to steal your bike!!!! so to prvent this lock ya **** up in tha house ,and get some homeowners/renters ins. or get full coversge on that ****!!!
Last edited by 100%_sukkafree; May 11, 2008 at 01:43 PM.
Thread Starter
I Chose to No Longer Post
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 355
From: Stuntshine St
Re: **Stunt 904**
did a lil research ....you cant just shoot somebody for stealing ya ****! so b4 for you go cammado on a ***** read this!
Generally, the “castle doctrine” provides that someone attacked in his home can use reasonable force, which can include deadly force, to protect his or another's life without any duty to retreat from the attacker.
3. Some states add a legal presumption about when a person is justified in using force against intruders. For example, Florida added a presumption that a person using force had a reasonable fear of death or serious injury to himself or another if (a) the person against whom he used force was illegally and forcefully entering a dwelling or occupied vehicle, was in the process of doing so, or removed or was attempting to remove a person against his will and (b) the person using force knew or had reason to believe this was occurring. These presumptions, which vary by state, have exceptions and do not apply under specified circumstances, such as when (a) the person force is used against had a right to be in the dwelling or was a lawful resident, (b) the person using force was engaged in illegal activity, or (c) the person force is used against is a law enforcement officer performing his duties who identified himself or the person using force knew or should have known the person was an officer.
When defending property, deadly force may be used only when it is necessary to defend a person from the use or imminent use of deadly physical force or infliction or imminent infliction of great bodily harm as described above (CGS § 53a-21).
for those of you that dont undastand this **** ....It says you can only kill a muthafucka ,if that ***** is tryin to kill you .........not because he is trying to steal your bike!!!! so to prvent this lock ya **** up in tha house ,and get some homeowners/renters ins. or get full coversge on that ****!!!
Generally, the “castle doctrine” provides that someone attacked in his home can use reasonable force, which can include deadly force, to protect his or another's life without any duty to retreat from the attacker.
3. Some states add a legal presumption about when a person is justified in using force against intruders. For example, Florida added a presumption that a person using force had a reasonable fear of death or serious injury to himself or another if (a) the person against whom he used force was illegally and forcefully entering a dwelling or occupied vehicle, was in the process of doing so, or removed or was attempting to remove a person against his will and (b) the person using force knew or had reason to believe this was occurring. These presumptions, which vary by state, have exceptions and do not apply under specified circumstances, such as when (a) the person force is used against had a right to be in the dwelling or was a lawful resident, (b) the person using force was engaged in illegal activity, or (c) the person force is used against is a law enforcement officer performing his duties who identified himself or the person using force knew or should have known the person was an officer.
When defending property, deadly force may be used only when it is necessary to defend a person from the use or imminent use of deadly physical force or infliction or imminent infliction of great bodily harm as described above (CGS § 53a-21).
for those of you that dont undastand this **** ....It says you can only kill a muthafucka ,if that ***** is tryin to kill you .........not because he is trying to steal your bike!!!! so to prvent this lock ya **** up in tha house ,and get some homeowners/renters ins. or get full coversge on that ****!!!
I AM NOT sticking up for the 904 boys, once i found out they were personal bikes, i got pissed. WHY would they do that?? Confuses me, its like knowing someone that has a lot going for them, then they rhow it away for what? Fucked up...to me theres a difference between going inside of a store and stealing ****, than taking someones personal ****
Also i am not trying to sound like ponis, i just agree with everything his bulletin said. The one thing i shouldve taken out is "i myself had nothing to do with it"...DUH. I hate how i have to explain myself all the time, im easily one of the most misunderstood fools on this website
The Mountain Killer
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,802
From: MT DORA FLORIDUHHH
Re: **Stunt 904**
You dont think Whoever owns the store that thats there personal **** you dumbfuck....... Something coming out of the store is hurting the owner of the stores pocket...................... Stealing is Stealing!
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,198
From: O'side, CA
Re: **Stunt 904**
did a lil research ....you cant just shoot somebody for stealing ya ****! so b4 for you go cammado on a ***** read this!
Generally, the “castle doctrine” provides that someone attacked in his home can use reasonable force, which can include deadly force, to protect his or another's life without any duty to retreat from the attacker.
3. Some states add a legal presumption about when a person is justified in using force against intruders. For example, Florida added a presumption that a person using force had a reasonable fear of death or serious injury to himself or another if (a) the person against whom he used force was illegally and forcefully entering a dwelling or occupied vehicle, was in the process of doing so, or removed or was attempting to remove a person against his will and (b) the person using force knew or had reason to believe this was occurring. These presumptions, which vary by state, have exceptions and do not apply under specified circumstances, such as when (a) the person force is used against had a right to be in the dwelling or was a lawful resident, (b) the person using force was engaged in illegal activity, or (c) the person force is used against is a law enforcement officer performing his duties who identified himself or the person using force knew or should have known the person was an officer.
When defending property, deadly force may be used only when it is necessary to defend a person from the use or imminent use of deadly physical force or infliction or imminent infliction of great bodily harm as described above (CGS § 53a-21).
for those of you that dont undastand this **** ....It says you can only kill a muthafucka ,if that ***** is tryin to kill you .........not because he is trying to steal your bike!!!! so to prvent this lock ya **** up in tha house ,and get some homeowners/renters ins. or get full coversge on that ****!!!
Generally, the “castle doctrine” provides that someone attacked in his home can use reasonable force, which can include deadly force, to protect his or another's life without any duty to retreat from the attacker.
3. Some states add a legal presumption about when a person is justified in using force against intruders. For example, Florida added a presumption that a person using force had a reasonable fear of death or serious injury to himself or another if (a) the person against whom he used force was illegally and forcefully entering a dwelling or occupied vehicle, was in the process of doing so, or removed or was attempting to remove a person against his will and (b) the person using force knew or had reason to believe this was occurring. These presumptions, which vary by state, have exceptions and do not apply under specified circumstances, such as when (a) the person force is used against had a right to be in the dwelling or was a lawful resident, (b) the person using force was engaged in illegal activity, or (c) the person force is used against is a law enforcement officer performing his duties who identified himself or the person using force knew or should have known the person was an officer.
When defending property, deadly force may be used only when it is necessary to defend a person from the use or imminent use of deadly physical force or infliction or imminent infliction of great bodily harm as described above (CGS § 53a-21).
for those of you that dont undastand this **** ....It says you can only kill a muthafucka ,if that ***** is tryin to kill you .........not because he is trying to steal your bike!!!! so to prvent this lock ya **** up in tha house ,and get some homeowners/renters ins. or get full coversge on that ****!!!
Thanks for the info bro!
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,059
From: Atlanta GA
Re: **Stunt 904**
That has to be impossible. I have A Dui, Class D , 4 speeding tickets, A Moving violation and Driving to endanger on my record and even with all that bullshit it was $1600 A year on my new gsxr back in 2006... $2800 A year for A bike with A clean Record is insane and can't be right!
So what would that mean? People with **** records would pay $5k A year on A bike?? NO ******* WAY! I'm calling shenanigans on that post!!! LOL.
So what would that mean? People with **** records would pay $5k A year on A bike?? NO ******* WAY! I'm calling shenanigans on that post!!! LOL.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 451
From: Riverside California
Re: **Stunt 904**
so then the thieves.. would see some welded box to your subframe with somes wires hanging out.. cause lojack must be supplied by a constant 12 volts .. then toss your whole subframe in a ditch.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 451
From: Riverside California
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,994
From: BFE, MD
Re: **Stunt 904**
came in handy one night when I did not know where the **** I was and had some car issues. 911 contcted my insurance had some people right out for me. cost me ten bucks for the call, plus $75 to my ins. company.
(it took like an hour and forty five minutes, but still...beats being out in BFE with no way to figure out where I was)
I am pretty happy with the idea, at least, and hope they advance the engineering to the point where it's more feasible to run lojack than not.
I keep wonderng why they can put a lojack in a freaking cell phone, but the units I have seen on people's vehicles were bigger than a cell phone and kind of obvious.
NealFoReal
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 36,000
From: QUEENS, NY BITCHES
Re: **Stunt 904**
excessa vbmenu_register("postmenu_3286770", true);
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: BFE, MD
Age: 39
Bike: YZ 250
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,821
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,994
From: BFE, MD
Re: **Stunt 904**
you'd be surprised.
if someone calls me to ask for directions, while I am giving them shitty directions which get them lost, I will also get lost and have to call someone to find out where I am.
fights start, pictures are took, bail is made, court dates are ignored,
process is repeated
if someone calls me to ask for directions, while I am giving them shitty directions which get them lost, I will also get lost and have to call someone to find out where I am.
fights start, pictures are took, bail is made, court dates are ignored,
process is repeated
