Hitting someone in the back of the head with a pool cue is an appropriate way to settle some disagreements.

Example?

That you don't, in fact, have eyes in the back of your head.

I find it an excellent way to end a disagreement on the best way to help the poor and the lonely.

Just when the pastor least expects it ... bang ?

I'd like to retract the comment above, it's wrong.

A cueball in a sock is far more effective.

Such as a disagreement over whether I am able to hit someone in the back of the head with a pool cue.

Re: the claim

Yes, I suppose if you include in-progress criminal activities such as rape, attempted murder or robbery under the rubric of "disagreements", yeah, then it could work for me.

Gah. I meant to wait a beat, and then pull out my final thought on the subject, but was waylayed by doing work related things.

"my final thought on the subject"

which was?

I'm a little surprised that so many people agreed with this without providing any rationale, even given the rather (trollish | subversive | dark humorous) nature of the claim.

Uhm, I am full of the suck at making myself clear. My apologies. I was hinting at this claim.

LogDog, terrifying, no? OTOH hand, this is jyte.

Ob300Reference: Terrifying?!? This is JYYYYYYYYYYTE. Ah.

D'A

(a) the claim struck me as humorous, and I voted in kind.

(b) it says "some" disagreements. I am sure, given thought, that I can think of a disagreement for which I would consider this appropriate.

(c) it doesn't say how hard you are hitting someone with the cue. If tapping Vynce on the back of the head with a pool cue when he makes a bad pun is wrong, I don't want to be right.

Madman: "given thought" is quite an understatement.

RZL: "LogDog, terrifying, no?"

Indeed. Now I see the sequence of claims leading up to this one.

I was imagining a version of West Side Story with pool-cue equiped youths moving in unison, tapping pieces of blue chalk against the butt ends in time to the theme music.

@Madman: Thanks for explaining how you came to your vote.

If I'm out playing pool, and some guy wanders up to a friend of mine and they have a disagreement about whether or not the friend of mine is going to go home with this schmuck, and his best argument is that he's got a good grip on her elbows and her purse, i will consider the pool cue to the back of his head one of many acceptable ways to settle it.

especially if said pool cue is wielded by the Right Reverend Zebediah Love, who would accept a gin and tonic as reparations for the fact that he probably messed up his shot on the eight-ball to catch the guy unawares.

As a bartender in a bar with a pool table, I would accept pool cue wielding as acceptable under very specific circumstances:

1. The guy has been a schmuck all night, and he refuses to leave.

2. You hold the cue properly, so that it doesn't break, or you replace it if you DO break it.

3. You dispose of the unconscious body in a way that will not get me or the bar (and preferably not you, either) in trouble.

See, now, I personally keep a Craftsman bottle opener on me at all times when I'm working--1 sharp rap to the temple and that cat is going to be out like a light. Smaller, and more durable, I prefer that over the pool cue, any day :)

My takeaway: Don't mess with Jaime.

but the temple gives him a chance to see it coming. if i'm resorting to violence, i usually have no interest in "fair" and care only about "effective" -- which means i'm totally willing to get him from behind. And if i'm willing, it's probably the right thing to do.