• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

The General Musings of Falkie2013 (George Senda, The Guy From Pittsburgh)

Started by heater, December 19, 2013, 09:37:40 PM

Should this thread be removed from the forum?

Yes
1296 (66.7%)
No
647 (33.3%)

Total Members Voted: 1937

Quote from: Happier Times are Coming on October 15, 2017, 07:26:18 PM
... as Falkie has mentioned repeatedly...
can't touch my welfare...

Well, we just have Falkie's comments on that to go by.

What if he's no more right about that than he is with trade mark and copyright law, and most of his other claims?


From what I recall years ago, true or not, even if you've played a character in a movie, the studio may -- or will own -- all rights to that character and the performer can only make money off of his or her own image. Not the character he or she portrayed.

I think I recall the British bodybuilder David Prowse ran into such trademark issues years ago. He was the original Darth Vader in the "Star Wars" film series. To earn a living, he went on those "sci-fi con" events to sign autographs and display his "image."

But people, of course, didn't recognize him. Because he was in costume in the movies. The rights to the character belonged to what would become "Lucas Entertainment." Not him. And I think I recall he was disallowed from using that for any and all personal appearance sans studio consent. Or more at percentages -- which were probably so expensive it would be cost ineffective to use.

So, supposedly, he was never able to use the "Darth Vader" character outright or its costume to earn for himself. So, all he could do was sell his own promotional photos as "himself" and exclude the "Darth Vader" image unless such rights were granted under contract.

Better to not be "made up" or in costume in some film to sell your own image, huh? If not, people may not be a bit interested in you -- since such rights to an "image" of such character may not -- and usually does not -- rest with the performer his or her self.   

Swishypants

Quote from: chefist on October 15, 2017, 08:44:27 PM
Ha another favorite...asking random police detectives about the law.  ;D


What the? Whozit? Why? He doesn't make any dissemination between the internet and real life.  And you don' t have to register a gun. If you buy one from another individual there doesn't even have to be a sales record of it. It's the same as you buying a book from your next door neighbor. Nobody knows, and it's perfectly legal. Has he even made one dollar from his internet recordings? I can't really wrap my head around this guy. He's an enigma.

GravitySucks

Quote from: Swishypants on October 15, 2017, 09:05:52 PM
What the? Whozit? Why? He doesn't make any dissemination between the internet and real life.  And you don' t have to register a gun. If you buy one from another individual there doesn't even have to be a sales record of it. It's the same as you buying a book from your next door neighbor. Nobody knows, and it's perfectly legal. Has he even made one dollar from his internet recordings? I can't really wrap my head around this guy. He's an enigma.

Not all state gun laws are the same.

Some states require an FFL to run a background check. Some require an FFL to perform the transfer. According to this, California is one of these states.

http://consumer.findlaw.com/consumer-transactions/private-gun-sale-laws-by-state.html

Quote from: Here We Go Again on October 15, 2017, 08:52:46 PM
From what I recall years ago, true or not, even if you've played a character in a movie, the studio may -- or will own -- all rights to that character and the performer can only make money off of his or her own image. Not the character he or she portrayed.

I think I recall the British bodybuilder David Prowse ran into such trademark issues years ago. He was the original Darth Vader in the "Star Wars" film series. To earn a living, he went on those "sci-fi con" events to sign autographs and display his "image."

But people, of course, didn't recognize him. Because he was in costume in the movies. The rights to the character belonged to what would become "Lucas Entertainment." Not him. And I think I recall he was disallowed from using that for any and all personal appearance sans studio consent. Or more at percentages -- which were probably so expensive it would be cost ineffective to use.

So, supposedly, he was never able to use the "Darth Vader" character outright or its costume to earn for himself. So, all he could do was sell his own promotional photos as "himself" and exclude the "Darth Vader" image unless such rights were granted under contract.

Better to not be "made up" or in costume in some film to sell your own image, huh? If not, people may not be a bit interested in you -- since such rights to an "image" of such character may not -- and usually does not -- rest with the performer his or her self.

The Lucus / Prowse  go back to the beginnings. Before Empire was released David let it slip that he was Lukes father. This caused a lot of tension between them and when it came to the unmasking they used someone else.
Lucas is loyal, when he could he brought back actors just so they could get paid. In the later films he even put Kenny Baker back in the R2 suit, and that was silly because you needed a person to do it in the seventies but not the nineties. But it shows loyalty.

Prowse was never brought back and never did an official Star Wars signing. But he did sign Darth merch right until this year but he said he had to quit because of health reasons.

Quote from: chefist on October 15, 2017, 08:44:27 PM
Ha another favorite...asking random police detectives about the law.

In a more recent video, when Falkie hears people making noise outside his hovel, he declares "if it wasn't illegal for me to have a gun, I'd get one. Some people have no respect for others," or something to that effect.

What does that mean? Taken in two parts.

Part One: Why is it "illegal" for him to have a gun? A past criminal conviction? Involuntary commitment to a mental institution? A valid, court-mandated restraining order for domestic violence?

Part Two: Do people making harmless noise in your neighborhood trigger that guy so bad? Like he feels he can use deadly force to suppress it? That statement made me worry about him: Either he will use a firearm to harm others unjustly or maybe himself is he gets depressed enough?

And he may fail to note that those normal, well-adjusted people in society do not approach law enforcement on the street and talk about guns! That is a red flag. Perhaps they confirmed his ID (what we call a citizen-courtesy check; more at a background check) and made note of that -- if they were street-wise guys on the ball -- just to have a record of someone who is wandering around the streets talking guns. OK?

Now, he's a member of the National Rifle Association? Despite his recent claims that's it's "illegal" for him to legally have a gun? What is the deal with that guy? If any of you have the resources for a paid search, run his full, middle and last name through the federal law-enforcement database to see what records come up, please. Please.


bateman

Yes, it’s true. Tactical genius that he is, General Senda turned the tanks on his own army.

chefist

Quote from: Here We Go Again on October 15, 2017, 09:29:22 PM
In a more recent video, when Falkie hears people making noise outside his hovel, he declares "if it wasn't illegal for me to have a gun, I'd get one. Some people have no respect for others," or something to that effect.

What does that mean? Taken in two parts.

Part One: Why is it "illegal" for him to have a gun? A past criminal conviction? Involuntary commitment to a mental institution? A valid, court-mandated restraining order for domestic violence?

Part Two: Do people making harmless noise in your neighborhood trigger that guy so bad? Like he feels he can use deadly force to suppress it? That statement made me worry about him: Either he will use a firearm to harm others unjustly or maybe himself is he gets depressed enough?

And he may fail to note that those normal, well-adjusted people in society do not approach law enforcement on the street and talk about guns! That is a red flag. Perhaps they confirmed his ID (what we call a citizen-courtesy check; more at a background check) and made note of that -- if they were street-wise guys on the ball -- just to have a record of someone who is wandering around the streets talking guns. OK?

Now, he's a member of the National Rifle Association? Despite his recent claims that's it's "illegal" for him to legally have a gun? What is the deal with that guy? If any of you have the resources for a paid search, run his full, middle and last name through the federal law-enforcement database to see what records come up, please. Please.

As often said, a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, wrapped in a conundrum....

chefist

Quote from: bateman on October 15, 2017, 09:40:13 PM
Yes, it’s true. Tactical genius that he is, General Senda turned the tanks on his own army.



Swishypants

Quote from: GravitySucks on October 15, 2017, 09:12:36 PM
Not all state gun laws are the same.

Some states require an FFL to run a background check. Some require an FFL to perform the transfer. According to this, California is one of these states.

http://consumer.findlaw.com/consumer-transactions/private-gun-sale-laws-by-state.html

The vast majority of gun sales are from private citizen to private citizen are not regulated.  If you buy from a store, yes, all that has to happen, but if you buy from your next door neighbor or uncle or some-such, none of that applies. There are 400 million guns in the USA. If not one more gun was ever made or imported it would be hundreds of years before a new one was needed. People who want the newest style buy from stores, but most Americans buy them from another citizen.  Totally legal. The Fed can only dictate gun laws to businesses. They have no authority to regulate citizen to citizen sales.

chefist

Quote from: bateman on October 15, 2017, 09:44:36 PM
Over $14.

George is justified in his anger that his "fans" and the "Righteous Army" were incapable of predicting the future.

GravitySucks

Quote from: Swishypants on October 15, 2017, 09:46:40 PM
The vast majority of gun sales are from private citizen to private citizen are not regulated.  If you buy from a store, yes, all that has to happen, but if you buy from your next door neighbor or uncle or some-such, none of that applies. There are 400 million guns in the USA. If not one more gun was ever made or imported it would be hundreds of years before a new one was needed. People who want the newest style buy from stores, but most Americans buy them from another citizen.  Totally legal. The Fed can only dictate gun laws to businesses. They have no authority to regulate citizen to citizen sales.

Once again the laws are different from state to state. The fed did not make these laws. The individual states made these laws. And you are wrong. The fed can make laws about private sales when these sales cross state lines and involve an interstate transfer. These sales between private citizens require delivery to an FFL holder that must perform a background check before releasing the weapon.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: GravitySucks on October 15, 2017, 09:56:18 PM
Once again the laws are different from state to state. The fed did not make these laws. The individual states made these laws. And you are wrong. The fed can make laws about private sales when these sales cross state lines and involve an interstate transfer. These sales between private citizens require delivery to an FFL holder that must perform a background check before releasing the weapon.

Confirmed: faggot troll.


Quote from: Rally Squirrel on October 15, 2017, 09:17:00 PM
The Lucus / Prowse  go back to the beginnings. Before Empire was released David let it slip that he was Lukes father. This caused a lot of tension between them and when it came to the unmasking they used someone else.
Lucas is loyal, when he could he brought back actors just so they could get paid. In the later films he even put Kenny Baker back in the R2 suit, and that was silly because you needed a person to do it in the seventies but not the nineties. But it shows loyalty.

Prowse was never brought back and never did an official Star Wars signing. But he did sign Darth merch right until this year but he said he had to quit because of health reasons.

Cool. I can note I recall hearing stories about some "fallout" years ago and Prowse claiming that George Lucas "screwed him" out of things, but if the actor violated a confidentiality agreement contract over the script and/or plot, well, then he shouldn't have done that.

Quote from: Swishypants on October 15, 2017, 09:46:40 PM
The vast majority of gun sales are from private citizen to private citizen are not regulated.  If you buy from a store, yes, all that has to happen, but if you buy from your next door neighbor or uncle or some-such, none of that applies. There are 400 million guns in the USA. If not one more gun was ever made or imported it would be hundreds of years before a new one was needed. People who want the newest style buy from stores, but most Americans buy them from another citizen.  Totally legal. The Fed can only dictate gun laws to businesses. They have no authority to regulate citizen to citizen sales.

Fine and well. But I bet if Falkie went up to cops on the street and started talking in the manner he described -- "Do I have to tell people online if I have guns or weapons?" -- he was immediately brought under scrutiny. I bet he was told to get against the nearest wall or object, told not to move and then be subject to "a pat-down." A weapons check. Then got his ID pulled and records-check run.

"Stop And Frisk Subject Under Reasonable Cause For Concern" (the citizen initiating contact with officers to ask -- or rant -- about possible weapons or gun possession) Then probably his name and address were "logged" for asking such insane questions.

What kind of fool goes up to experienced cops and asks: "Do I have to tell people online if I have guns or weapons?" What a dunce. Yes, maybe this clown obtained such in an unlawful manner. Such as what the cops would want to know if accosted on the street by someone who is talking the way that guy in the video claimed he did. 




Quote from: chefist on October 15, 2017, 10:22:12 PM
ha...George will be back...we all know it...but he will have to pay the piper.

It wouldn't surprise me one bit if Kathy drank all his Pepto-Bismol again.

chefist

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on October 15, 2017, 10:40:48 PM
It wouldn't surprise me one bit if Kathy drank all his Pepto-Bismol again.

Ha...OMG...all the stories after all these years...how many season are there now? 9? 10? I thank you "inside man" types...God bless you all....

I miss, "Inside Man"...hope to hear from him again soon...

Swishypants

Quote from: Here We Go Again on October 15, 2017, 10:08:59 PM
Fine and well. But I bet if Falkie went up to cops on the street and started talking in the manner he described -- "Do I have to tell people online if I have guns or weapons?" -- he was immediately brought under scrutiny. I bet he was told to get against the nearest wall or object, told not to move and then be subject to "a pat-down." A weapons check. Then got his ID pulled and records-check run.

"Stop And Frisk Subject Under Reasonable Cause For Concern" (the citizen initiating contact with officers to ask -- or rant -- about possible weapons or gun possession) Then probably his name and address were "logged" for asking such insane questions.

What kind of fool goes up to experienced cops and asks: "Do I have to tell people online if I have guns or weapons?" What a dunce. Yes, maybe this clown obtained such in an unlawful manner. Such as what the cops would want to know if accosted on the street by someone who is talking the way that guy in the video claimed he did.

Cops have far more important things to worry about and there are 1.5 guns for every citizen and illegal in the USA. The assumption is: EVERYONE has a gun. Pew polls say 36% but few people answer those accurately and they are targeted to begin with. At least half the country has firearms. Cops don't have time to worry about ever second person they see or talk to having a gun.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: Swishypants on October 15, 2017, 10:46:25 PM
Cops have far more important things to worry about and there are 1.5 guns for every citizen and illegal in the USA. The assumption is: EVERYONE has a gun. Pew polls say 36% but few people answer those accurately and they are targeted to begin with. At least half the country has firearms. Cops don't have time to worry about ever second person they see or talk to having a gun.

WRONG! The assumption is that you're a faggot!  ;D


Swishypants

Quote from: GravitySucks on October 15, 2017, 09:56:18 PM
Once again the laws are different from state to state. The fed did not make these laws. The individual states made these laws. And you are wrong. The fed can make laws about private sales when these sales cross state lines and involve an interstate transfer. These sales between private citizens require delivery to an FFL holder that must perform a background check before releasing the weapon.

Negative. Citizen to Citizen does not require FFL transfer. Only BUSINESS to Citizen or if you send it through UPS. The states have no more right to regulate a gun sale between two private citizens than they do the sale of a book or magazine. It's private property (NOT COMMERCIAL) by that point and the government is out of the picture then.

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: Swishypants on October 15, 2017, 10:48:20 PM
Negative. Citizen to Citizen does not require FFL transfer. Only BUSINESS to Citizen or if you send it through UPS. The states have no more right to regulate a gun sale between two private citizens than they do the sale of a book or magazine. It's private property (NOT COMMERCIAL) by that point and the government is out of the picture then.

They should have the right to regulate your faggotry because it's out of control!  ;D

Swishypants

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on October 15, 2017, 10:49:33 PM
They should have the right to regulate your faggotry because it's out of control!  ;D

Post more faggot memes slave!


Swishypants

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on October 15, 2017, 10:53:13 PM
Now that I know you want more I've grown bored with it.  :D

You don't have the mental faculties to grow bored with it. You only discovered your penis 42 years ago and you still can't stop playing with it!

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod