Jump to content


Photo

US 2016 Presidential Election (Part 5)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
814 replies to this topic

#81 DarkNemesis

DarkNemesis

    Keeper of the Threads

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,284 posts

Posted 23 October 2016 - 03:27 PM

And hunt. 
 
And protect your property.
 
And protect your family.

And possibly even protect your neighborhood.

There are plenty of more practical reasons before the whole fight tyranny reason arises. All of which are still relevant.


We're talking two different issues now. Yes, guns can be used for all those things and I don't disagree with any of them. But those reasons are not why the 2nd amendment exists. They're not why the Founders made it a point for citizens to have the right to bear arms.

 

I wonder if they are any mention of owning guns or arms in the Magna Carta. In the context of the 2nd amendment like rights.

 

EDIT: This has been a thing (armed citzenry) for awhile in the Britain and the UK.


Edited by DarkNemesis, 23 October 2016 - 03:34 PM.

Kubo's announcement will be his new work will be called Tide; not as strong as bleach but does its trolling in a more colorful fashion! - arcane_chaos

Spoiler

#82 Peleihno

Peleihno

    F*ck Trump

  • Blessed by Uglypuff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,615 posts
  • LocationThe New New Frontier

Posted 23 October 2016 - 03:36 PM

We're talking two different issues now. Yes, guns can be used for all those things and I don't disagree with any of them. But those reasons are not why the 2nd amendment exists. They're not why the Founders made it a point for citizens to have the right to bear arms.
 
I wonder if they are any mention of owning guns or arms in the Magna Carta. In the context of the 2nd amendment like rights.
 
EDIT: This has been a thing (armed citzenry) for awhile in the Britain and the UK.


They most certainly are, the second amendment was added in for a multitude of reasons not one.

The most important is, of course, to fight tyranny if it arises. A good reason to have implemented it and a good reason to keep it. Not that it's ever going anywhere.

Anyway, this is getting off topic.

If he weren't such a Bolshevik towards guns and XL soft drinks, then I'd be cool for a Bloomberg presidency.

Edited by Peleihno, 23 October 2016 - 03:40 PM.

Spoiler Fun Posts

x3z7kg.jpg

"Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty
lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding." — Louis Brandeis, 1928


#83 Trowa Barton

Trowa Barton

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,225 posts
  • Locationon the edge of insaninty

Posted 23 October 2016 - 03:58 PM

And this is why I wish I had a functional time machine. Because I'd love to go back in time and bring the founding fathers back to present day America and ask their opinion on the first ten amendments.

 

Because I get the feeling we get so caught up in following the spirit of a given amendment we miss the intent, and vis versa.


  • waleuska and Blue22 like this

#84 Phenomiracle

Phenomiracle

    Hime

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,255 posts
  • LocationGarden State

Posted 23 October 2016 - 04:31 PM

What intent is missed?

 

The threat of over-reaching, tyrannical government will always be timeless, which is what the Founding Fathers foresaw. Nothing about the 21st century would have them suddenly change their perspective on that.


  • Peleihno and JasonDM like this

L o y a l t y              |             B l o o d l i n e

ZmZNGgT.gif

 


#85 RamenRenegade

RamenRenegade

    Rock Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,717 posts
  • LocationThe Dark Side of the Moon

Posted 23 October 2016 - 04:36 PM

And hunt. 
 
And protect your property.
 
And protect your family.

And possibly even protect your neighborhood.

There are plenty of more practical reasons before the whole fight tyranny reason arises. All of which are still relevant.

We have had elections during and running up to the Civil War and WWII, we'll be fine.
 

 

Hunting does not require automatic or even semi-automatic weapons. Neither does protecting your property or even your family. And protecting your neighborhood? From who? From what? Do we live in a universe where we have "The Purge"? Did that law pass at some point? I mean honestly, do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds? I once went to Georgia to visit family and while I was down there, I was at my cousins' house and opened his closet and he had handguns, shotguns and even grenades. I asked him what he needed that for. He shrugged and said, just in case. In case what? Trust me, if you knew my cousin, you would not be comfortable with the idea that he has grenades. It's insane.

 

 

Open carry is an entirely different issue that is usually pushed by gun nuts. That's more about the scope of gun ownership and if it can tread into public spaces. Bloomberg just hates guns in general when they're not on cops or his ex-special ops bodyguards. If your issue is with OC, we are talking two different things. 
 
Gun-related death and violence has fallen considerably over the last two decades, don't buy the hype unless you live in the South Side of Chicago. 
 
Crime and violence in America will possibly always be abnormally high compared to the rest of the advanced world though for the foreseeable future, don't expect us to become Finland ever. I don't see how any of this impacts our greatness, the freedom to own guns is valiant. Free and open societies come with a basic level of risk attached in terms of citizen violence, the greater the freedom, then the relevant risks rise accordingly. But I agree that attacks by gun nuts on reasonable restrictions is lunacy and just as bad as the clueless, anti-gun nutjobs with no respect for the constitution. A balan/ce must be struck, is that what you mean?

 

Actually, my issue is with private (untrained) citizens being allowed to purchase and store automatic, semi-automatic weapons and explosive ordinance. My issue is with the fact that we live in a country where a 17 yr old can't by beer, can't smoke weed, can't join the military or police force, but can go to gun show (without adult supervision) purchase an automatic rifle, ammo and leave no questions asked. And if that kid were to then use said weapon to kill people in school or at a movie theater, night club or church, gun nuts want to focus the person and not the system that allows such a person to get his hands on the guns.

 

You talk about free and open societies coming with a certain level of risk of violence. Of course. But guess what? China is a free society. Japan too. Germany, France, Australia, Italy, Belgium, England, South Africa, Canada and yes, even Finland. All of these countries enjoy the same freedoms we do. Hell, some have more freedom as we still struggle to determine who can use what bathroom and we have a candidate who wants to build a fucking wall.

 

None of them allow their citizens to carry guns with as little restriction as us (if at all) and yet somehow, miraculously, their societies thrive, their citizens are still safe and they have less violence and less people in prison than we do by a wide margin. If the 2nd amendment exists to protect us from the invisible boogie man, then where was the armed militia of heroes during 9/11 or the nightclub shooting in Florida or Columbine or any other fucking gun related massacre that's happened on US soil in the past 30 years. The 2nd amendment is a relic from a by gone era when white Americans needed to protect themselves from Europeans or the Indians who wanted their land back from the people who decided they could take it because they had...surprise...guns. We haven't actually needed our citizens to be armed since the 30s.

 

I was in the military, and by the standards of our country I required months of training to know how to properly use, store and maintain any weapon they gave me. In that same country, a teenager can walk into a gun show, or go online and purchase an even more powerful weapon and we don't ask them to be trained, licensed or even be sane. We ask no questions. Hell, there are people on no fly lists because we consider them to be possible criminals or terrorists, yet those same people can purchase a weapon legally in our country. And when pressed, gun lobbyists and apologists will just yell, second amendment! because they lack any real intellectual or cogent argument against stricter laws and fact remains that for manufactures it about money and for the apologists it's about the "Gu'ment tellin me what ta do!!"

 

At the very least, I think our laws should be like Canada's. They require 60 days to wait, thorough psychological and criminal background checks and no open carry laws and no online/gun show loopholes. You also can't purchase automatic or semi-automatic weapons either.

 

BTW, I also have an issue with the fact that the second amendment is really a white man's law. But that's an issue I just won't go into detail further.


Edited by RamenRenegade, 23 October 2016 - 04:58 PM.

  • Blue22 likes this

4139c0ca-f053-40db-8794-a7ad05685299.jpg

"A Wise Man Can Learn More From A Foolish Question

Than A Foolish Man Can Learn From A Wise Answer." Questions?

Join the Legion of Ramen / My Fanfiction Account

Heaven & Earth: The NaruSaku FC

Spoiler A list of Ramen's Nicknames

Spoiler Favorite All-time Manga
  •  

  • #86 waleuska

    waleuska

      Pirate

    • Members
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 6,863 posts
    • Locationeverywhere but nowhere

    Posted 23 October 2016 - 04:38 PM

    What intent is missed?

     

    The threat of over-reaching, tyrannical government will always be timeless, which is what the Founding Fathers foresaw. Nothing about the 21st century would have them suddenly change their perspective on that.

    No, it isn't. Hell, we lost more right because of the patriot act and yet everyone with guns did nothing about it.

     

    In today age guns are not going to stop a tyrannical government.


    p5Y5w8P.jpg


    #87 Peleihno

    Peleihno

      F*ck Trump

    • Blessed by Uglypuff
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 2,615 posts
    • LocationThe New New Frontier

    Posted 23 October 2016 - 05:10 PM

    Hunting does not require automatic or even semi-automatic weapons. Neither does protecting your property or even your family. And protecting your neighborhood? From who? From what? Do we live in a universe where we have "The Purge"? Did that law pass at some point? I mean honestly, do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds? I once went to Georgia to visit family and while I was down there, I was at my cousins' house and opened his closet and he had handguns, shotguns and even grenades. I asked him what he needed that for. He shrugged and said, just in case. In case what? Trust me, if you knew my cousin, you would not be comfortable with the idea that he has grenades. It's insane.
     
     
    Actually, my issue is with private (untrained) citizens being allowed to purchase and store automatic, semi-automatic weapons and explosive ordinance. My issue is with the fact that we live in a country where a 17 yr old can't by beer, can't smoke weed, can't join the military or police force, but can go to gun show (without adult supervision) purchase an automatic rifle, ammo and leave no questions asked. And if that kid were to then use said weapon to kill people in school or at a movie theater, night club or church, gun nuts want to focus the person and not the system that allows such a person to get his hands on the guns.
     
    You talk about free and open societies coming with a certain level of risk of violence. Of course. But guess what? China is a free society. Japan too. Germany, France, Australia, Italy, Belgium, England, South Africa, Canada and yes, even Finland. All of these countries enjoy the same freedoms we do. Hell, some have more freedom as we still struggle to determine who can use what bathroom and we have a candidate who wants to build a fucking wall.
     
    None of them allow their citizens to carry guns with as little restriction as us (if at all) and yet somehow, miraculously, their societies thrive, their citizens are still safe and they have less violence and less people in prison than we do by a wide margin. If the 2nd amendment exists to protect us from the invisible boogie man, then where was the armed militia of heroes during 9/11 or the nightclub shooting in Florida or Columbine or any other fucking gun related massacre that's happened on US soil in the past 30 years. The 2nd amendment is a relic from a by gone era when white Americans needed to protect themselves from Europeans or the Indians who wanted their land back from the people who decided they could take it because they had...surprise...guns. We haven't actually needed our citizens to be armed since the 30s.
     
    I was in the military, and by the standards of our country I required months of training to know how to properly use, store and maintain any weapon they gave me. In that same country, a teenager can walk into a gun show, or go online and purchase an even more powerful weapon and we don't ask them to be trained, licensed or even be sane. We ask no questions. Hell, there are people on no fly lists because we consider them to be possible criminals or terrorists, yet those same people can purchase a weapon legally in our country. And when pressed, gun lobbyists and apologists will just yell, second amendment! because they lack any real intellectual or cogent argument against stricter laws and fact remains that for manufactures it about money and for the apologists it's about the "Gu'ment tellin me what ta do!!"
     
    At the very least, I think our laws should be like Canada's. They require 60 days to wait, thorough psychological and criminal background checks and no open carry laws and no online/gun show loopholes. You also can't purchase automatic or semi-automatic weapons either.
     
    BTW, I also have an issue with the fact that the second amendment is really a white man's law. But that's an issue I just won't go into detail further.


    No one under 18 can legally buy a fiream last I recall.

    A white man's law? Lol, so much could be said about that kind of racialized rhetoric. Ironically, the mission of white supremacy in the post-antebellum south was, for years, to keep black Americans from arming themselves en masse. An armed Black America would have been FAR better off.

    Anyway, I'm not invested enough to answer all this and I mean no disrespect when I say that. So, agree to disagree.

    I have zero interest in being like Canada barring universal healthcare, or anyone else for that matter.
     
    BTW, China is in no way a free society. What the hell are you talking about? Wtf, did you mean South Korea?

    And this is why I wish I had a functional time machine. Because I'd love to go back in time and bring the founding fathers back to present day America and ask their opinion on the first ten amendments.
     
    Because I get the feeling we get so caught up in following the spirit of a given amendment we miss the intent, and vis versa.


    I doubt they'd say anything different from what sensible gun owners have been saying. Fair regulation, not overbearing, that's the key.

    Edited by Peleihno, 23 October 2016 - 05:12 PM.

    • Damanos likes this

    Spoiler Fun Posts

    x3z7kg.jpg

    "Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty
    lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding." — Louis Brandeis, 1928


    #88 Trowa Barton

    Trowa Barton

      Member

    • Members
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 1,225 posts
    • Locationon the edge of insaninty

    Posted 23 October 2016 - 09:56 PM

    @Peleihno Empasis on "sensible"

     

    And I'd like to point out the founding fathers idea of a rifle was a breach loading weapon that had a rate of fire of once every 3 odd minutes. I'd also like to point out the second amendment contains the words "for a well regulated militia". Which I'd like to point out we have in the form of the National Guard. 


    Edited by Trowa Barton, 23 October 2016 - 10:09 PM.


    #89 Ganderath

    Ganderath

      Sardine

    • Members
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 945 posts
    • LocationSerbian Fetish Dungeon

    User's Awards

       2    2   

    Posted 23 October 2016 - 10:25 PM

    And I'd like to point out the founding fathers idea of a rifle was a breach loading weapon that had a rate of fire of once every 3 odd minutes.

     

    This is a really common myth that has all sorts of migraines built into it.

     

    First off...

     

    1. "Rifle"-You mean musket, rifles were largely uncommon and just entering service in the British Army.

     

    2. "Breach Loading"-No. While the Ferguson rifle was breach loading, it wasn't really popular at all. Most muskets(and rifles) of the time were muzzle-loaded.

     

    3. Reload speed-Your average trained soldier could reload in 20-30 seconds and British regulars were known to fire off four shots a minute, the fucking meme of reloading taking ten years comes from people not knowing what they're doing trying to reload these guns and fucking up.

     

    4. Lewis and Clark were armed with repeating rifles, the Puckle Gun was known by the founding fathers. Jefferson and the Democratic Republicans were in love with the idea of submarines(yes they were experimenting with them at the time). Technology changed during the lifetime of many of these men...and they still kept the law around. Because it was written in such a fashion as to be applicable to a wide variety of situations and protect basic rights, as well as adapt to the different times if need be. 

     

    And as another note, before using the Founding Fathers as an argument, consider that this was a group of people cooperating towards a common goal despite having different beliefs. Hamilton and Jefferson mostly couldn't stand each other(both of them wrote Washington letters calling the other treasonous and delivered them on the same day, despite both being his cabinet members), Washington wanted out of politics altogether for the most part. Adams was obsessed with pretending to be nobility(look up a list of titles he suggested that the US use), and Aaron Burr(yes, he was important beyond shooting Hamilton) was both an egalitarian and a traitor(or at the very least, courted someone who was very definitely a traitor). What they thought changed over time and was never a unified opinion. There are shared IDEAS(they agreed on a right to bear arms, for instance) but what they wanted from it differed(Jefferson could never stop jacking off the idea of a militia army). So if you're going to use these guys as the foundation of your own opinion, remember that they are not a bloc that all thought alike.

     

     

    The 2nd amendment is a relic from a by gone era when white Americans needed to protect themselves from Europeans or the Indians who wanted their land back from the people who decided they could take it because they had...surprise...guns. We haven't actually needed our citizens to be armed since the 30s.

     

    I don't even know where to start with this, your point is so broad and so exaggerated as to become meaningless. Try and narrow it down to a more specific incident or idea(for instance, saying "Europeans wanted their land back" from...European-originating settlers...likewise with saying guns was the reasoning, just...what?) or for instance, address Peleihno's point that the Black Codes(and later Jim Crow laws) had the intent to disarm black Americans, which is at the very least, a single point to argue against.

     

     

    China is a free society.

     

    Spoiler

    • retroluffy13, Damanos and JasonDM like this

    9uDrnRm.png


    #90 Damanos

    Damanos

      Owner of DEW's soul

    • Blessed by Uglypuff
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 5,240 posts

    User's Awards

            

    Posted 23 October 2016 - 11:29 PM

    Actually, my issue is with private (untrained) citizens being allowed to purchase and store automatic, semi-automatic weapons and explosive ordinance. My issue is with the fact that we live in a country where a 17 yr old can't by beer, can't smoke weed, can't join the military or police force, but can go to gun show (without adult supervision) purchase an automatic rifle, ammo and leave no questions asked.

     

    Literally factually incorrect on all counts related to guns.  We aren't allowed to own automatic weapons, no exceptions.  Yes, even the big scary black "assault rifles" are only capable of firing a grand one round per pull of the trigger.  There's a federal law in place preventing anybody under 18 from possessing a handgun or handgun ammunition, the vast majority of states similarly restrict purchase of long guns based on age. 

     

    Seriously, this could have been fact checked in 30 seconds, the only reason I'm bothering to reply to this is just in case somebody were to take it at face value. 

     

     

    None of them allow their citizens to carry guns with as little restriction as us (if at all) and yet somehow, miraculously, their societies thrive, their citizens are still safe and they have less violence and less people in prison than we do by a wide margin. If the 2nd amendment exists to protect us from the invisible boogie man, then where was the armed militia of heroes during 9/11

     

    >armed militia of heroes during 9/11

     

    Ah yes, because as we know, you're totally allowed to bring guns on a plane with you.  Are you even fucking trying? 

     

     

    or the nightclub shooting in Florida or Columbine or any other fucking gun related massacre that's happened on US soil in the past 30 years.

     

    Also gun free zones.

     

    I mean, I'd argue against your positions here, but you're doing such a fantastic job of it yourself.


    • JasonDM likes this

    TwjBrPX.png


    #91 DarkNemesis

    DarkNemesis

      Keeper of the Threads

    • Members
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 16,284 posts

    Posted 23 October 2016 - 11:44 PM


    We aren't allowed to own automatic weapons, no exceptions.

     

    You're allowed to own automatic weapons manufactured before 1986, with a permit.


    Kubo's announcement will be his new work will be called Tide; not as strong as bleach but does its trolling in a more colorful fashion! - arcane_chaos

    Spoiler

    #92 retroluffy13

    retroluffy13

      Keeper of the Beasts

    • Banned
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 9,873 posts

    Posted 23 October 2016 - 11:54 PM

    election thread guys.

     

    cause i reallly want to continue this discussion but i fear how far id take it. 

     

    for example:  i dont own a gun.  should i?  why or why not???  whos got the best argument????

     

    but seriously we need to get out of this thread and back into older ones.  I mean the elections nearly over so its not like the threads got that much of a lifespan left in it.


    Edited by retroluffy13, 23 October 2016 - 11:56 PM.

     this is a music video I made for a friend of mine.  give it a listen.  the visuals are pretty dope

    Spoiler


    also some ear kandy
    Spoiler

    when you love something..  and I mean. really love it.  you fight for it for as long as you can until you cant stand any longer.  then when its all said and done, walk away with a smile hoping you did right.


    #93 Damanos

    Damanos

      Owner of DEW's soul

    • Blessed by Uglypuff
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 5,240 posts

    User's Awards

            

    Posted 23 October 2016 - 11:56 PM

    You're allowed to own automatic weapons manufactured before 1986, with a permit.

     

    And have fun trying to do that. 


    TwjBrPX.png


    #94 retroluffy13

    retroluffy13

      Keeper of the Beasts

    • Banned
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 9,873 posts

    Posted 24 October 2016 - 12:04 AM

    quit poking fun at stupid laws your gonna hurt dead, washedup polliticians feelings.


     this is a music video I made for a friend of mine.  give it a listen.  the visuals are pretty dope

    Spoiler


    also some ear kandy
    Spoiler

    when you love something..  and I mean. really love it.  you fight for it for as long as you can until you cant stand any longer.  then when its all said and done, walk away with a smile hoping you did right.


    #95 DarkNemesis

    DarkNemesis

      Keeper of the Threads

    • Members
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 16,284 posts

    Posted 24 October 2016 - 01:36 AM

    @Peleihno Empasis on "sensible"

    And I'd like to point out the founding fathers idea of a rifle was a breach loading weapon that had a rate of fire of once every 3 odd minutes. I'd also like to point out the second amendment contains the words "for a well regulated militia". Which I'd like to point out we have in the form of the National Guard.


    Speaking of which...

    It's gonna be hard to recruit to people to fight another war when you're forcing them to pay back retention bonuses. California National Guard have to pay back bonuses, says the Pentagon.

    Edited by DarkNemesis, 24 October 2016 - 01:38 AM.

    Kubo's announcement will be his new work will be called Tide; not as strong as bleach but does its trolling in a more colorful fashion! - arcane_chaos

    Spoiler

    #96 Ganderath

    Ganderath

      Sardine

    • Members
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 945 posts
    • LocationSerbian Fetish Dungeon

    User's Awards

       2    2   

    Posted 24 October 2016 - 02:24 AM

     I'd also like to point out the second amendment contains the words "for a well regulated militia". Which I'd like to point out we have in the form of the National Guard. 

     

    I forgot to address this.

     

    "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." No where in there is "for", it means that the militia is necessary for security, and thus the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

     

    Now, to go into this, because "National Guard" is not the well regulated militia, requires a bit of insight into what the militia was.

     

    The militia was...well...just what you could round up, and by "you" I mean the states. It was not to be and was never intended to be the tool of the Federal government. This is something that the Federalists and Democratic-Republicans would FIGHT over(Hamilton tried to create a National Army, Jefferson tried to gut the Navy, so on and so forth). Militias existed as a quickly formed volunteer force created by rounding up whoever knew how to shoot and getting them to follow you. Shays Rebellion was put down by a militia quickly formed out of private groups and state funded militiamen. The idea of a Federal entity that existed as a quasi-standing army of sorts would be totally alien and likely horrifying to many of the Founders(with the exception of the High Federalists, because those guys seriously wouldn't have minded an American English style monarchy). 

     

    The extent to which they'll hold to this dedication to see the militia upheld(again, a collection of private individuals willing to fight for their country, not a government created entity) is astonishing, especially the Democratic-Republicans(who...really were the country with the exception of New England at the end of Adam's presidency). Let me put it clearly how much the Jeffersonians loved the idea of militia but hated a government run military.

     

    They refused to increase and fund the military(even cutting it back) in the same period of time that they sought war with Great Britain(leading to the War of 1812), purely because they wanted individual militiamen to win the war.

     

    Even AFTER the war, wherein the best performance came from the Regulars, everybody still lauded the militiaman or Kentucky rifleman. Because people loved Jefferson's idea of an America composed of yeoman farmers and landowners who existed in smaller self-contained and self-sustaining communities(seriously, Jefferson had a lot of...interesting, but unfeasible ideas about how society should go and what is the best option).

     

    There are a lot of pieces of culture and ideas that don't translate very well to modern times because the idea of them have changed. "Gentlemen" were supposed to run government, "gentlemen" being well-to-do folks who weren't involved in business and thus had the time to ponder the workings of government and whatever they need to know and thus make decisions without any outside bias because they themselves are already well off. That idea...doesn't really apply anymore today and indeed ended pretty quickly in the start of the 1800s. Hell, for the longest time before Jefferson was in office, democracy was a dirty word. These guys are pretty fascinating, but if you're going to use them, at least understand what their ideas of what they wrote about were.


    • Damanos likes this

    9uDrnRm.png


    #97 Blue22

    Blue22

      Mage

    • Members
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 3,711 posts

    Posted 24 October 2016 - 03:01 PM

    http://www.ew.com/ar...n-night-parties

     

    Because this totally doesn't sound like an idea that could easily go south VERY fast :xD:


    • Peleihno and DarkNemesis like this

    #98 DarkNemesis

    DarkNemesis

      Keeper of the Threads

    • Members
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 16,284 posts

    Posted 24 October 2016 - 03:14 PM

    http://www.ew.com/ar...n-night-parties

     

    Because this totally doesn't sound like an idea that could easily go south VERY fast :xD:

     

    And I thought FOX was bad. CNN is trying too hard make its own news. "Breaking News! Riots have broken out at..... well everywhere we partnered with AMC." :lol:

     

    At least they had the good sense to have the parties at different AMC venues.


    Edited by DarkNemesis, 24 October 2016 - 03:19 PM.

    Kubo's announcement will be his new work will be called Tide; not as strong as bleach but does its trolling in a more colorful fashion! - arcane_chaos

    Spoiler

    #99 Narubi

    Narubi

      Forever Dreaming

    • Blessed by Uglypuff
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 5,125 posts
    • LocationSitting alone in the dark, and contemplating life.

    Posted 24 October 2016 - 08:10 PM

    Question to the board. 

     

    Usually it's a factor in elections. But this time or at least to my knowledge, it really sticks out. 

     

    Do you think that there's enough done to inform the people about the political candidates and what it is they're wanting to push forward when an if they are elected? As well with the issues surrounding the world, state of the nation, and currently in office politicians?

     

    I ask, cause I can't help but notice how people seem to not have all the facts about things, or have even bothered in trying to look up the facts. I mean there's still people who believe that Obama is a Muslim, and that he's never presented his birth certificate, or how everything is worse then it was during the recession. Shit like that. lol

     

    Granted we'll always have those people who will refuse to look at those facts, and claim them as false or misleading .. or whatever. An we can't force them to think or see otherwise. Nor should anyone try to. But has there been enough done to show or encourage people to look up the facts regarding this election and current issues, so that they can be better informed and more likely to make a more educated vote for whatever to be this year on Nov. 8th?


    Show me the way to go home - I'm tired and I want to go to bed
    I had a little drink about an hour ago - And it’s gone right to my head
    Wherever I may roam - On land or sea or foam
    You can always hear me singing this song
    Show me the way to go home.

    #100 Peleihno

    Peleihno

      F*ck Trump

    • Blessed by Uglypuff
    • PipPipPipPipPip
    • 2,615 posts
    • LocationThe New New Frontier

    Posted 25 October 2016 - 03:08 PM

    Question to the board. 
     
    Usually it's a factor in elections. But this time or at least to my knowledge, it really sticks out. 
     
    Do you think that there's enough done to inform the people about the political candidates and what it is they're wanting to push forward when an if they are elected? As well with the issues surrounding the world, state of the nation, and currently in office politicians?
     
    I ask, cause I can't help but notice how people seem to not have all the facts about things, or have even bothered in trying to look up the facts. I mean there's still people who believe that Obama is a Muslim, and that he's never presented his birth certificate, or how everything is worse then it was during the recession. Shit like that. lol
     
    Granted we'll always have those people who will refuse to look at those facts, and claim them as false or misleading .. or whatever. An we can't force them to think or see otherwise. Nor should anyone try to. But has there been enough done to show or encourage people to look up the facts regarding this election and current issues, so that they can be better informed and more likely to make a more educated vote for whatever to be this year on Nov. 8th?


    It's not an issue of availability, there's an overflow of information, if anything. The issue is accountability on the part of voters. People who think Obama is a Muslim want to believe that, self delusion is a powerful thing. In America, we have a wave of people that have no interest in being informed voters. We can only do so much.

    This is all worsened by what Asimov called a cult of anti-intellectualism in American society. It's most apparent with the right and its masochistic base of poor and working class white voters but exists on the left with a fervor against GMOs, nuclear power, and vaccines -- the latter being the product of anti-scientific propaganda.

    Edited by Peleihno, 25 October 2016 - 03:08 PM.

    • Funktastic and /2aw like this

    Spoiler Fun Posts

    x3z7kg.jpg

    "Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty
    lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding." — Louis Brandeis, 1928





    0 user(s) are reading this topic

    0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users