10
AccountWasFree 10 points ago +12 / -2

All cops uphold unjust laws through threat of violence. That's literally their role. Compliancy doesn't change that reality.

21
AccountWasFree 21 points ago +22 / -1

But he's white, so he'll be forgotten in a week.

Anyone who ever doubts this simple fact need only look at the Daniel Shaver case.

The fact that there's an international movement because some scumbag druggie died of an overdose and not that the police executed a man on his knees says all you need to know about the state of the world.

14
AccountWasFree 14 points ago +15 / -1

You want to know the real injustice here? Unless those cops face jail time, not one of them will face actual punishment. Fines get sent to their boss, so that's just taxpayer money. Leave is a slap on the wrist at best, and most times includes still being paid. Being fired is also laughable considering they just opened fire on an unarmed man.

It should be clear that every single cop involved should be hanged. They're thugs that tried to kill a man. Qualified immunity is an abhorrent policy and anybody who should require such a policy should not be a police officer, no exceptions.

Fuck these pigs. And make no mistake, the cops will come after you if you're on the wrong side of the political line. There is no thin blue line, there is just them and their orders. Any hold outs are being weeded out and there are efforts to federalise the police force around America. The state is not your friend. It will never be your friend.

0
AccountWasFree 0 points ago +1 / -1

Of course it is. And it's a decent jumping off point for the ideology, but to suggest it's representative is beyond retarded.

Sadly, that propaganda is also a big part of what stops many libertarians from taking that leap and fully shedding statist beliefs.

3
AccountWasFree 3 points ago +4 / -1

Okay. You do that. Then you'll be given two options: deal with court and have to pay legal fees (or defend yourself and probably lose because you don't know how to draw shit out long enough for this to be repealed), or you'll resist that as well and enter into a situation where you'll face prison for evading court dates.

And while I respect standing your ground, it should be clear that you probably won't win. Best case scenario is that you're capable of becoming a martyr akin to Ruby Ridge, except you probably won't because that was heavily due to entrapment.

14
AccountWasFree 14 points ago +16 / -2

And what do you think will happen if they simply ban it anyway?

Nobody is going to revolt. Comfort is still too high for that. They'll simply go around censoring people and charging them, clog up the courts for a few years, have the average people suffer not for the penalty but for the legal fees, and then get the compromise half-way point anyway because that's what always happens.

The Constitution is a speed hump, not a barrier. It stops very little, contrary to popular belief.

4
AccountWasFree 4 points ago +5 / -1

WELL FUCKING DUH!

How many times, how many fucking times, do the conservatives need to have the president, both houses and all the fucking representatives they could possibly need, only to continually compromise on every fucking issue?

Establishment conservatives are controlled opposition. The state is not your friend. The state never will be your friend. The only winning move is to stop playing the game of the elites and reject the system. The state only serves itself, and it cannot be changed from within.

0
AccountWasFree 0 points ago +1 / -1

Again, you have no worries about spending COLLECTIVE hours reading shit like politico, but Razorfist is low quality?

The straws you're grasping at to maintain this MuH BiG BrAiN shit would be funny if it weren't so sad, because you actually believe this makes you smarter. Go debate the internet commies because that's higher quality than watching a video in the background.

3
AccountWasFree 3 points ago +4 / -1

One half is kinda just wanting the false flag they're gonna do to get it over with. The other half is just over it and doesn't want to deal with the impending stupidity from "normal" people.

0
AccountWasFree 0 points ago +1 / -1

For a single topic, maybe. For a bunch of minor topics even. Most people are gonna have political disagreements at some level. But when it's major issues that are founded from fundamental disagreements, then it's a little harder to just go "well, we have a slight difference of opinion", because it's not a slight difference, it's a fundamental difference.

This doesn't change by ignoring the problem. Ignoring the problem is how we got here. Stop trying to play by the rules they never played by at any point.

1
AccountWasFree 1 point ago +2 / -1

lol, you'll collectively waste hours upon hours "debooooonking" people you'll never convince, but you'll go right ahead and virtue signal about how you didn't watch a video because it was "too long".

Which is even funnier considering it can easily be watched in the background while doing most other things. For example, I watched/listened to it while I did some housework. It wasn't hard.

2
AccountWasFree 2 points ago +3 / -1

ABC (Australia) and SBS (again, Australia) as well. Basically, any organisation that receives funding primarily through state (re:taxpayer) funds. Ideally any organisation that gets any funds from the government, but that's just me.

2
AccountWasFree 2 points ago +3 / -1

Well, if you watched the video, like I just did, you'd know that the election that was held? To say it was rigged would be an insult to rigged elections. Soviet Russia held "elections", didn't mean it was all that redeeming.

If I'm going to spend an hour, I'd rather spend it on something that is objective, rather than a polemic.

You've spent collective hours reading Politico, NYT, WaPo, and countless hours on Twitter. Don't pretend like this is a matter of "objectivity" when your concern lays solely at not wanting to examine a topic that could shake your core if you gave it a fair go.

Lincoln was a piece of shit. You think dictator is hyperbolic? Fine, you don't have to use the word, but at the end of the day, his policies were not anti-slavery (outright protecting slavery in the states that he retained control over), nor was he some saviour. His focus was taxation at all costs, including breaching the Constitution numerous times.

Wallow in comfort if you truly need to, but know that's all it is. It's not a moral choice, it's not an intellectual choice, it's comfy, blissful ignorance. Even if you still disagreed at the end, you'd still be better off instead of dismissing it out of hand because you're uncomfortable that someone uses a word you find too harsh.

5
AccountWasFree 5 points ago +6 / -1

/>comment posted 12 minutes after this post was made

So you didn't watch the video to see the evidence put forward and just resorted to the knee-jerk reaction?

Full disclosure, I haven't watched it yet either, but at least look at what he has to offer for you to look at before dismissing it out of hand.

7
AccountWasFree 7 points ago +8 / -1

Nah, they don't really believe that. Deep down they know the truth. They just don't want to accept it. This is their cope to avoid coming to terms with reality.

0
AccountWasFree 0 points ago +1 / -1

For a court of law, sure. For the court of public opinion? Let's just say that the benefit of the doubt is for those that I have a doubt about.

3
AccountWasFree 3 points ago +4 / -1

So what, I can play as a native and scalp the neighbouring tribe now?

4
AccountWasFree 4 points ago +6 / -2

Fumbling to his side for 5+ seconds leading up to the shooting is "super quick"? Once it's out he pulls it up quickly, but he was fumbling to get it.

However, on looking at the video again, it does seem like his jacket is what was on the seat next to him, which might have been where his gun was. Poor storage compared to something sensible like an actual holster, but it explains the fumbling on his left for the first 5+ seconds. Even if you give him the bare minimum of time to draw, he could have drawn at the 13 second mark of the video OP posted. It wasn't until the 19th or 20th second until it was drawn and then shot. That's slow and sloppy.

12
AccountWasFree 12 points ago +13 / -1

Uh oh, we got a Thin Blue Liner here.

If it's a perfectly justified example of defence, then the innocent are not to be terrorised by armed thugs.

27
AccountWasFree 27 points ago +28 / -1

Or he knows that police are not the good guys. And look at that, in a clear cut case of defence against an assailant the police are looking for this guy. Police are not friends of the public, they're lapdogs of the state.

-5
AccountWasFree -5 points ago +8 / -13

I do. Baldy was fuckin' slow on getting that gun out. Maybe he wanted to be more cautious thinking the other guy had a real firearm and all that, but that was still pretty slow overall.

If you're going to carry, make sure you know what you're doing. Go to the range and practice this shit when possible. You're carrying for a reason, not just for shits and giggles. Might as well hone that skill even if you think it's somewhat insignificant.

2
AccountWasFree 2 points ago +3 / -1

I guess, but it still seems inflated.

2
AccountWasFree 2 points ago +3 / -1

I honest to god don't know a single person who saw Avatar in cinemas. I only know a single person that has even talked about Avatar, and that was only as an example in another discussion about movies in general, not the film itself.

Who the fuck went to see Avatar in cinemas? Who actually watched this movie and paid money? I knew more people who watched fucking Morbius than people who saw Avatar. How the fuck has it supposedly made money?

Also, not gonna suffer because like this film, I won't be watching the others either. And frankly, if the talk about those films is as much as the talk about this film, I think I'll be completely fine.

18
AccountWasFree 18 points ago +19 / -1

To be entirely fair, 400 odd women aren't really representative and there's selection bias.

That said, flexible work hours has always been a priority for women over pay, along with things like shorter/easier commutes. It's been spoken about for decades now for the reason for the so called "wage gap". And obviously, when those factors are taken into account, as well as comparing job for job (rather than just gross wages across the board), the wage gap vanishes and in many instances goes the other way.

This isn't new. Flexible work locations was always going to be added to the list if it became normal.

7
AccountWasFree 7 points ago +9 / -2

It really is amazing just how Kotaku and co managed to lie to the public about GG and people believed it wholesale while turning around and saying things like this. You freaks are literally the reason Kotaku and co still have credibility. Because it's not just Kotaku, it's the whole fucking industry that is like this. But none of you mentally ill cunts give a shit because "hur dur we hate white people".

Kotaku played you lot like a fucking fiddle, you don't get to turn around now and pile on against them without admitting that maybe you were wrong about GG as well.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›