Random Politics & Religion #00
|
Random Politics & Religion #00
In Italy it's actually being discussed a law to create the car homicide. If you run someone over with your car you get charged for murder, which is not the case now. This cause there are so many stupid accidents due to imbeciles driving while drunk or on drugs that cause a lot of deaths.
YouTube Video Placeholder Cerberus.Pleebo said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » I guess deaths only matter when you they can be used as a political wedge. Liberal compassion is only for those who can be exploited. Why does it only trigger outrage for you when there is a mass shooting prompted by a "gun free zone" I mean way more people are murdered than those only involved in mass shootings. Car fatalities are quite comparable in terms of total numbers, and those aren't even recognized as an inalienable right. Why is it that you only pipe up against guns? you anti-gun people will never win. guns always beat no guns in a fight.
[+]
Caitsith.Shiroi said: » I'm all for more severe laws and sentences You would!... stoopid canajian.... you sir, can go straight to hell.... /points down
[+]
Caitsith.Shiroi said: » Try that against a Jedi! I blame the blaster manufacturers for their wild inaccuracy.
[+]
Something tells me that a fully automatic gun would be able to hit a Jedi far easier than a blaster would.
Caitsith.Shiroi said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Why does it only trigger outrage for you when there is a mass shooting prompted by a "gun free zone" I mean way more people are murdered than those only involved in mass shootings. Car fatalities are quite comparable in terms of total numbers, and those aren't even recognized as an inalienable right. Why is it that you only pipe up against guns? Guns are meant to kill, while cars are meant for transport. There's quite a huge difference between the two. I'm all for more severe laws and sentences about cars, like drunk driving .... you should go straight to jail and lose your licence for a long time on the first offense. A gun's purpose is more often realized without it ever killing anything than it is after shots are fired. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » A gun's purpose is more often realized without it ever killing anything than it is after shots are fired. I just lost 10,000 brain cells trying to decipher that enigma.
[+]
[+]
Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Caitsith.Shiroi said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Why does it only trigger outrage for you when there is a mass shooting prompted by a "gun free zone" I mean way more people are murdered than those only involved in mass shootings. Car fatalities are quite comparable in terms of total numbers, and those aren't even recognized as an inalienable right. Why is it that you only pipe up against guns? Guns are meant to kill, while cars are meant for transport. There's quite a huge difference between the two. I'm all for more severe laws and sentences about cars, like drunk driving .... you should go straight to jail and lose your licence for a long time on the first offense. A gun's purpose is more often realized without it ever killing anything than it is after shots are fired. Trying to use the nuclear armament argument for small arms is like comparing running errands to supplying the international space station. Small arms are not a deterrent when they're used constantly and for exactly their intended purpose. Build all the weapons you want, I got the power of the crystals, and summons!
Jassik said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Caitsith.Shiroi said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Why does it only trigger outrage for you when there is a mass shooting prompted by a "gun free zone" I mean way more people are murdered than those only involved in mass shootings. Car fatalities are quite comparable in terms of total numbers, and those aren't even recognized as an inalienable right. Why is it that you only pipe up against guns? Guns are meant to kill, while cars are meant for transport. There's quite a huge difference between the two. I'm all for more severe laws and sentences about cars, like drunk driving .... you should go straight to jail and lose your licence for a long time on the first offense. A gun's purpose is more often realized without it ever killing anything than it is after shots are fired. Trying to use the nuclear armament argument for small arms is like comparing running errands to supplying the international space station. Small arms are not a deterrent when they're used constantly and for exactly their intended purpose. How many crimes are thwarted without ever pulling the trigger? I'm not really sure why you simply refuse to even acknowledge this point? Ragnarok.Nausi said: » The danger is specifically directed anyway at mainly things worked in a certain way like hotdogs. Normal meat, so to speak, is only dangerous if eaten in too high quantities. I can see this being particularly problematic for the typical american diet, but it's been known since forever that a high meat diet considerably lowers the lifespan. You need a varied diet, with a lot of (seasonal)veggies and fruit, legumes and eat in small quantities but many times a day. If you don't you'll die sooner. edit: oh and ofc "junk food" is a no no Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Jassik said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Caitsith.Shiroi said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Why does it only trigger outrage for you when there is a mass shooting prompted by a "gun free zone" I mean way more people are murdered than those only involved in mass shootings. Car fatalities are quite comparable in terms of total numbers, and those aren't even recognized as an inalienable right. Why is it that you only pipe up against guns? Guns are meant to kill, while cars are meant for transport. There's quite a huge difference between the two. I'm all for more severe laws and sentences about cars, like drunk driving .... you should go straight to jail and lose your licence for a long time on the first offense. A gun's purpose is more often realized without it ever killing anything than it is after shots are fired. Trying to use the nuclear armament argument for small arms is like comparing running errands to supplying the international space station. Small arms are not a deterrent when they're used constantly and for exactly their intended purpose. How many crimes are thwarted without ever pulling the trigger? I'm not really sure why you simply refuse to even acknowledge this point? And how many crimes are the result of the escalation inherent to being armed? How many crimes are exactly the result of pulling the trigger? Sorry, but if texting and driving prevented half a dozen accidents, it will never outweigh the number it causes. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Does anyone here really believe eating bacon is going to give them cancer? the real question is, does anyone care that bacon will give you cancer?
[+]
Jassik said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Jassik said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Caitsith.Shiroi said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Why does it only trigger outrage for you when there is a mass shooting prompted by a "gun free zone" I mean way more people are murdered than those only involved in mass shootings. Car fatalities are quite comparable in terms of total numbers, and those aren't even recognized as an inalienable right. Why is it that you only pipe up against guns? Guns are meant to kill, while cars are meant for transport. There's quite a huge difference between the two. I'm all for more severe laws and sentences about cars, like drunk driving .... you should go straight to jail and lose your licence for a long time on the first offense. A gun's purpose is more often realized without it ever killing anything than it is after shots are fired. Trying to use the nuclear armament argument for small arms is like comparing running errands to supplying the international space station. Small arms are not a deterrent when they're used constantly and for exactly their intended purpose. How many crimes are thwarted without ever pulling the trigger? I'm not really sure why you simply refuse to even acknowledge this point? And how many crimes are the result of the escalation inherent to being armed? How many crimes are exactly the result of pulling the trigger? Sorry, but if texting and driving prevented half a dozen accidents, it will never outweigh the number it causes. Lmao, you're really reaching on that one Jassik. The proper comparison is: Because some people do bad things with X (cell phones), such as Y (texting while driving) we should ban all cell phones. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Because some people do bad things with X (cell phones), such as Y (texting while driving) we should ban all cell phones.
[+]
Valefor.Sehachan said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » The danger is specifically directed anyway at mainly things worked in a certain way like hotdogs. Normal meat, so to speak, is only dangerous if eaten in too high quantities. I can see this being particularly problematic for the typical american diet, but it's been known since forever that a high meat diet considerably lowers the lifespan. You need a varied diet, with a lot of (seasonal)veggies and fruit, legumes and eat in small quantities but many times a day. If you don't you'll die sooner. edit: oh and ofc "junk food" is a no no There it is, outright credit to the governing authority, and full suspicion of the element of capitalism. What has the meat industry ever done to deserve that from you? Uh what? Government actually has a very strong interest in diffusing the alarmism since they make money off meat. That's actually, you know, research.
Valefor.Sehachan said: » Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Because some people do bad things with X (cell phones), such as Y (texting while driving) we should ban all cell phones. You're just refusing to acknowledge that a gun doesn't have to kill anyone to still serve a purpose. Ragnarok.Nausi said: » You're just refusing to acknowledge that a gun doesn't have to kill anyone to still serve a purpose. like the sign on the statue of liberty says
give us your tired, your poor, your unwashed dregs of humanity, your criminals, rapists, murderers, thieves, religious nutjobs etc. everyone that stayed in europe are a bunch of pansies without the energy to even argue much less fight.... look at those woosies in france...they barely have the will to complain
[+]
Valefor.Sehachan said: » Uh what? Government actually has a very strong interest in diffusing the alarmism since they make money off meat. That's actually, you know, research. Do you not recognize any political benefit to smearing the meat industry? Until a synthetic meat is invented, I already stated that in what you quoted.
|
All FFXIV and FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD.
FINAL FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.