| Haboob |
06-12-2015 03:03 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by JARblue
(Post 3226763)
Excuse me? He was preventing the Jeep from parking there. Sorry but that's a douche move. I don't think the Jeep driver was entitled to park like that; I'm saying your argument could be seen by the Jeep driver as feeling entitled to park like that.
Talk about a conflicting statement lol ... if it isn't right to take up two spots, then how is the Jeep driver ENTIRELY at fault? Even if you don't think the Lambo driver is a douche, that doesn't absolve him of fault :shakes head:
Pulling the Jeep's valve cores after he parked like that and walked away is not defending your property. It's called petty retaliation :ugh2:
Look, we all know that parking like a douche is potentially drawing attention to your vehicle. So if you were the Lambo owner and decided to park like that, you have to know that there's a possibility of someone fucking with your car. You were the first douche, so for you to say they shouldn't mess with your car but then say you are entitled to fuck with their car in retaliation, that's the definition of a hypocrite.
|
The Jeep doesn't have to park there. There's clearly a closer spot right next to him. The Jeep owner is instigating all of this.
There's nothing hypocritical about the statement, lol. Stop trying to make it so. You're not messing with anyone's car and there are clearly closer and other open spots. Gives no one the right to block you in like that, so yes, valve cores is defending your car, not petty retaliation.
The Lambo owner did absolutely nothing to the Jeep owner, or anyone else. Yes, he's a shitty parker, but the Jeep has other (and better) options to park, he chose to be a douche. |
