Jump to content

Selous Templar

Member
 View Profile  View activity

  • Posts

    2,156

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Selous Templar

    "Corrupt a Wish"

    in Forum Games

    Posted

    Granted, but they are worthless from the hyper-inflation, and they spontaneously combust upon physical contact

     

    I wish I could have X-ray vision so I could stare through people's (and some women's) clothes

    General American Politics Thread

    in Serious Topic Discussion

    Posted

    I would just like to point out that burning the American flag is just a sign of protest. You are legally entitled to your first amendment, and burning a piece of cloth won't get you arrested in a sane country. As well, you cannot be hypocritical about such things if you are wearing clothing with the American flag printed on, because, surprise surprise, that is not what the flag codes say is respectful. "No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations." Contrarily, you probably *can* wear it as a sign of respect, it's just that context matters.

     

    Correct, still most americans are patriotic, so even if it's legal, it's still very disrespectful to many americans and war veterans if someone burns the flag.

     

    However, this isn't quite what I'm here for. I would like to point out the futility of prosecuting people with crimes for something honestly pretty negligible. When a person is convicted for possession of illegal substances and has not committed any other crime, it is the worst mistake possible to be made, because when you charge someone with that, you soil their public record, and are likely to make any chances of their employment impossible. We incarcerate people who could be rehabilitated properly, if we could just look at other countries and say, "Hey, this works for them, let's investigate it!" and have an intelligent discussion about it, but we radicalize, getting to the point where we refuse to even acknowledge the source of an argument from someone else. What is the cause for people to make these arguments? Is it a racist bias? Are they getting the information from a credible source?

     

    Nah (what the hell even is a "racist bias"? That sounds like something that an SJW would think of, no offense)

    I think it's just because people sometimes don't want to admit they were wrong about something.

     

    While there are many issues with our system, we would rather form petty arguments than discuss this rationally. I have heard of no other Islamic terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11,

     

    Ok, so you've not heard of the 2002 Los Angeles Airport shooting?

    The 2009 Little Rock recruiting office shooting? The Ford Hood shooting?

    The 2013 Boston Marathon bombing?

    The 2014 Queen's Hatchet attack?

    The 2015 Curtis Culwell Center shooting? The Chattanooga shootings? The San Bernardino shooting?

    The 2016 Orlando Night Club shooting? The New York/New Jersey Bombings? The Ohio State University attack?

    And even recently the 2017 Lower Manhattan Truck attack?

    And that's just America. I haven't even counted the worldwide list.

    Do you have a really poor memory, or did you legit not know about these?

     

    while many domestic terrorist activities have been caused by white supremacists, notably not immigrants, and people who are desperate for fame, and will do the worst act possible to achieve this.

     

    [Citation Needed]

    You're right about fame though. Most mass shooters are narcissists who want to do better than the last one they see on the news, so they can be some kind of anti-hero post-humorously.

     

    The republican platform seems to consist of: "Look at how vulnerable our children are to these horrors! We need to prevent exposure to video games!"

     

    Yeah, but we don't live in the 1990's anymore. They lost the argument on that, they don't care about it anymore. If anything it's Democrats like Weyland Yee who care about "violent videogames" and the left with their reaction to Gamergate. I was not happy with Trump doing it though, that was stupid of him, but the dude's an old man who cares about making america more rich. He's the business president, not the social issues one, whether we like it or not. He's too misinformed on this topic and probably doesn't know what he's saying.

     

    and in the next day, criticize teenagers for pointing out flaws in their gun policies

     

    You mean "not allowing a bunch of traumatized teenagers from dictating to the entire American public what their rights must be".

    Never mind that (IMO) that they are exploiting the easily preventable (if the police did their fucking jobs) massacre and using the bodies of their dead friends as a stepping stone to fame and stardum, as well as literally prostituting themselves out to MSM companies like CNN. Does't sound like the people who I would want to tell me what I can't do. They can have their say, but no one has to do anything for them.

     

    all because the politicians want to keep raking in NRA cash.

     

    Yes, on both sides. Democraps get funding from the Illegal weapons trade, and the Rhino Republicunts get NRA funding (which isn't even that much really)

     

    Why do you think that there are so many companies which have pulled out of agreements with the NRA?

     

    Because they're cowards who capitulate to anti-gun extremists as to satisfy a small minority of people.

     

    They are realizing that people DON'T like the NRA.

     

    If by "People" you mean a "very small minority of extremists" then you would be correct.

     

    The NRA might have membership of 5 million, but what is that compared to a country with a population of 321 million? That's less than 0.02 percent!

     

    Yeah, you do realise that not every pro-gun American is an NRA member. A hell of a lot of Americans love their firearms

     

    Their spokesperson actively speaks out against the survivors

     

    Yeah, because she's a smart strong independent woman who won't be lectured to by traumatized survivors who honestly don't know what they're talking about.

    BTW isn't it funny how the media will latch onto the survivors who want gun control, but won't give a platform to students who are pro-gun, like Columbine shooting survivor Patrick Neville, or in CNN's case, will call said survivors as liars:

    http://deadline.com/2018/02/cnn-denies-writing-school-shooting-survivor-question-town-hall-1202299515/

     

    of a shooting that was a direct result of the NRA's policies.

     

    Where the hell did you pull that one from? No mate, it was a direct result of the FBI and the Police that refused to respond to the 39 phone calls for help and do anything about the shooter, deciding to stand back and do absolutely fucking nothing to stop it.

    Listen, if you are anti-gun, they are supposed to be the people who will defend you right?

    But they did nothing! Add the fact that the Sheriff Scott Israel won't take responsibility, won't resign, got payed $51 million, and bought a Lamborghini right after the shooting is proof to me that you can't trust (most of) your police, and it's clear to see why America needs it's second amendment (and federalist papers).

     

    The NRA endorsed trump

     

    Because that's a no-brainer (maybe literally)

     

    and he subsequently decided to "make it easier for mentally ill people to acquire guns"

     

    Wrong. Extremely mentally ill people already can't get guns, the law Trump overturned was a regulation that was a breech of privacy of the individual requiring unnecessary background checks, on top of the ones already needed for firearm purchase. For example, a Trans-sexual is classified as mentally ill. Under the law, if that person wanted to buy a firearm, they would need to basically DOX themselves untop of a background check for the weapon. Now that law is gone.

     

    Over 1,000 people have died in these mass shootings

     

    Which only statistically makes up 13% of gun related deaths. Most gun deaths are from suicides, but most firearm homicide is Gang Warfare, surprisingly in the states which have the highest level of gun control laws (makes you think), such as Chicago and Detroit, using illegally acquired firearms. If you want to stop the majority of gun death, you should look into gang warfare. BTW it's not just gangs who get killed. Lots of innocent bystanders get killed too.

     

    These are terrorist attacks, in our own country, while we proceed to go to countries across an ocean and fight for a "War Against Terror," arguably making these countries worse, rather than helping them. We come through and destroy infrastructure and provide little to no substitute afterwards, making it easier for these forces for which we are fighting, to maintain control. Fighting a fire but not getting to the root of it, is obviously the least effective way of handling it.

     

    Absolutely Correct. America has been doing it for their military-industrial complex, so it's a good thing that people are starting to take none of that bullshit. America should pull out of the middle east, send the refugees back, and leave them alone. The people of the middle east will dictate what happens to their country, not the USA.

    "Corrupt a Wish"

    in Forum Games

    Posted

    Granted, but you put on weight from not eating chocolate, meaning you have to eat chocolate to not put on weight.

     

    I wish I could slow down time like Max Payne so I could wage a 1 man war against the Italian and Russian Mafia.

×
×
  • Create New...

This website uses cookies, as do most websites since the 90s. By using this site, you consent to cookies. We have to say this or we get in trouble. Learn more.

  I accept