| Board List | |
|---|---|
| Topic | Pregnant women in immigration detention under Trump saying been denied medical |
| darkknight109 08/06/18 1:05:47 AM #145 | Rasmoh posted... Not only is it overwhelmingly more ethnically homogeneous Rasmoh posted... A segment of our population that totals more than 7 times the total population of Norway revels in a culture that glorifies crime and treats it like a goal to aspire to Sorry, but if this is where you're taking this debate, I'm out. Racist horseshit like this does not merit a serious response. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Pregnant women in immigration detention under Trump saying been denied medical |
| darkknight109 08/05/18 9:16:20 PM #141 | Rasmoh posted... Illegals have made shitloads of industries unworkable for normal citizens because they're willing to be modern day slaves, which drives down wages and work conditions. And yet, in areas where immigrants (legal or otherwise) are removed from industries (whether that be through ICE raids or political actions like Brexit), the market fails to self-correct. Even when the employers go on hiring blitzes and hike wages, native-born citizens are simply uninterested in much of the work being offered. Rasmoh posted... And again, their children increase competition in the overall labor pool, which suppresses wages across all industries because of a surplus of labor. The US unemployment rate is currently 3.9%. That is not, by any stretch, a surplus of labour. If you want to understand why wages are stagnant, you might turn an eye towards how the Republican party has spent the last few decades slowly but steadily gutting the ability of unions to negotiate for better conditions. The correlation of anti-union laws and wage inequality is so perfectly negative it may as well be causal. Rasmoh posted... The problem is that not being quick and callous against criminals results in a horrifically bloated system that ends up rewarding criminal behavior. Literally every system of criminal punishment that doesn't quickly punish and remove criminals is bloated to the point of nigh-ineffectiveness. Meanwhile, in Norway, a system built around rehabilitation of criminals, where they are allowed to live in cabins, get treatment for addiction and anger issues, and learn trades to improve their employability upon release, has been so successful that the country is having to shut down prisons because it no longer incarcerates enough people to fill them. Their recidivism rate is less than 20%. By comparison, the US - with one of the most punitive justice systems in the developed world - has a recidivism rate of 77%. Let that sink in for a moment. If prisons were a black box, where criminals go in one end and productive citizens are supposed to come out of the other, the US has a success rate of just 23%. If almost four out of every five products coming out of a factory were defective, that factory would be closed in a heartbeat - but America just accepts this state of affairs despite a plainly better method being available. Surprise! When you actually bother to help criminals get skills that allow them to live in a non-criminal fashion, they tend to actually be productive! --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Pregnant women in immigration detention under Trump saying been denied medical |
| darkknight109 08/05/18 9:13:08 PM #140 | Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted...So... do you just not know what a "crime rate" is? So you don't know. Got it. Here's the explanation: crime rates are adjusted for population. The raw number of people (or crimes) doesn't matter - it's the number of crimes committed per 100k people. Try again. Rasmoh posted... Illegal immigrants may pay in more than they consume as a stand-alone statistic, but their 5 children who are "legal" courtesy of 14th amendment loophole bullshit demolish that gap thanks to food stamps, medicaid, welfare housing, translation services, etc. You're moving the goalposts because you're no longer talking about illegal immigrants - now you're just talking about legal citizens. Regardless, I'm interested in seeing a source on this "staggering" burden, because I've never come across any such analysis. Rasmoh posted... Literally impossible because 100% of illegal immigrants are criminals. You know what the fuck I meant by that - don't be obtuse, you're smarter than this. Rasmoh posted... And again, their children drive up these crime rates but get lumped into the native-born citizen category to further the disparity. Wrong. While the children of illegal immigrants do have higher crime rates than their parents, they are not higher than the national average. It typically takes between one and two generations for crime rates to "normalize"; at no point are the rates for immigrants and their children, including illegal immigrants, higher than the general population. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Pregnant women in immigration detention under Trump saying been denied medical |
| darkknight109 08/05/18 5:13:42 PM #136 | Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted...The relationship between illegal immigration and crime has been extensively studied and an overwhelming majority of analyses indicate that illegal immigrants commit crime at markedly lower rates than native-born citizens. This, again, makes logical sense. The majority of those immigrating are doing so for the improved economic opportunity the US offers; to that end, it is not in their interest to risk coming to the attention of the authorities and being deported by committing crimes. An influx of illegal immigration has actually been noted to result in a decrease in violent crime. So... do you just not know what a "crime rate" is? lihlih posted... Wait, how do they pay payroll tax when they have no SSN? They're forced to work under the table because of that The process is explained in greater detail here: https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/how-do-undocumented-immigrants-pay-federal-taxes-an-explainer/ tl;dr - for payroll taxes, they can just submit under a fake SSN. An employer withholds payroll taxes for all employees, legal or not, and submits them to the government. In theory the IRS could launch an investigation of an employer/employees who submit under false SSNs, but that rarely happens, since the IRS is more interested in going after people who aren't paying at all. For tax returns, they can just use an ITIN, no SSN required. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Pregnant women in immigration detention under Trump saying been denied medical |
| darkknight109 08/04/18 12:05:40 AM #133 | Rasmoh posted... How is it not equally callous to force our own citizens to bear the burden of unchecked illegal immigration? You do realize that lower and middle class people are the ones who have to deal with the plethora of negatives associated with people illegally entering our country, right? Is it not callous tell someone that they have to deal with increased taxes, even more thinly stretched social programs, increased crime, suppressed wages, etc or they're evil? So, a couple of things here: 1) Illegal immigrants are net payers into the social welfare system. They pay things like sales tax and payroll tax, just like everyone else, and thereby help to pay for programs that they are ineligible to take advantage of, such as Social Security and Medicare. A study - commissioned by the Trump administration, who then attempted to suppress the results when they discovered that it didn't support their views - determined that illegal immigrants over the last decade paid about $63 billion more into government coffers than they cost. In other words, if, tomorrow, every illegal immigrant in America decided to self-deport, the government would suffer a net loss of about $7 billion a year. The idea that illegal immigrants are a drain on social programs is pure fantasy. 2) The relationship between illegal immigration and crime has been extensively studied and an overwhelming majority of analyses indicate that illegal immigrants commit crime at markedly lower rates than native-born citizens. This, again, makes logical sense. The majority of those immigrating are doing so for the improved economic opportunity the US offers; to that end, it is not in their interest to risk coming to the attention of the authorities and being deported by committing crimes. An influx of illegal immigration has actually been noted to result in a decrease in violent crime. You can read more about it here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1745-9125.12175 3) The idea that immigrants suppress wages is the only one of the points you brought up that is at least debatable. Studies have shown mixed results, but the general trend is that wage suppression as a result of illegal immigration is either extremely minor or non-existent. In addition, illegal immigrants tend to do work in areas that native-born citizens refuse to work in (such as agriculture), either because of low pay, the brutal nature of the job, or both. 4) Even if you disregard all of the above, you didn't actually address the point raised against you, which is this: Even if you acknowledge that these people are criminals and the accepted punishment for their crime is deportation, that does not mean you need to be cruel and callous in your application of that punishment. You can deport someone without being a heartless asshole to them, as pretty much every prior administration has managed to prove. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/25/18 6:19:44 PM #206 | Revelation34 posted... I misread your post. How badly did you misread my (multiple) posts that you decided to argue that "You flat out claimed they were thrown out"? Revelation34 posted... You made the claim they weren't. Simple as that. Prove they weren't also thrown out. Again, I don't need to prove something didn't happen. Here, let's make this easy. I hereby claim that I cannot use telekinesis. Are you going to disbelieve that claim? After all, I haven't offered any evidence in support of that notion. What if someone named Bob comes along later and says I'm lying and I actually *can* use telekinesis? Are you taking Bob's side? Again, I made the claim first, so those rules you made up say that the burden of proof lies with me. In that situation, anyone sensible would say that the burden of proof lies with Bob, not me. I haven't given any evidence to support my claim that I can't use telekinesis, true, but it's almost impossible for me to do so anyways - how am I to prove that I can't do something? In addition, Bob's claim both violates Occam's Razor ("the simplest explanation is the most likely") and is the one arguing a positive claim (that I *can* use telekinesis). Logically, people would want to see a video of me making things float or something similar before they believed Bob. Now let's review the facts of our situation. -TC's friend swore after straining his back -Woman politely asked him to mind his language -TC escalated the confrontation by swearing at the woman and her kids -Woman's husband "gets involved" -TC and friend are thrown out of the store We can draw a few inferences from this: -Although we don't know what "gets involved" means, it's very likely that it didn't involve punches being thrown or else the cops would have been involved. As such, this was probably restricted to arguing. -Bearing that in mind, there's almost nothing the woman and her husband did that would be grounds for evicting them from the store. She made a polite request to someone, he verbally engaged after TC's friend had escalated the situation by speaking in an insulting (and, depending on how the friend was acting, possibly threatening) manner. -Further supporting these points, TC does not mention any physical confrontation, nor does he mention the other family being thrown out, even though both of those would presumably warrant mention in his story if they happened. So we have two possible situations here: -TC and friend were thrown out of the store. Nothing else of note happened to the woman and her husband. This fits with what we know as fact and does not require any additional assumptions. -TC and friend were thrown out of the store and so were the woman and her family. This requires us to assume that one or both of them acted in a way that warranted their removal, which is something not stated or alluded to in the TC's post. It also requires us to add an additional action to that "list of facts" above. Occam's Razor indicates that the first situation, by dint of requiring fewer assumptions, is more likely and burden of proof would be to prove they were thrown out, not vice versa. Russell's Teapot further affirms that the burden of proof would be on saying the family was thrown out, as you cannot ask someone to disprove an unproven action. In essence, if we look at a situation with unknowns, the proper assumption is to assume a null response, that nothing happened to them beyond what we know. The last we know of the woman and her husband, they were still in the store after their argument with the TC's friend; unless you have proof to the contrary, it's assumed by default that that's where they remained afterwards. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/25/18 5:44:35 PM #202 | Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted...I have literally never claimed the family was thrown out. I've been arguing the exact opposite of that for a while now. Do try to keep up. From the first: "Notably, the family was not asked to leave" From the second: "Weird how the other family wasn't thrown out as well" From the third: "Again, note that the other people in this confrontation were not asked to leave" So congratulations on proving yourself exactly wrong. Revelation34 posted... You're the one who made the original claim which is how the burden of proof always works. You can keep repeating this while ignoring all evidence to the contrary and it doesn't make you any more correct. You can't ask me to prove that something you made up didn't happen. We were never told that the family was thrown out; ergo, they weren't thrown out, unless you can provide reason or evidence why that would not be so. If you want to allege that they were, in fact, thrown out, then the burden of proof to do so rests with you. Revelation34 posted... They used "cocksucker" in Vice city which is far worse than "fuck" My memory of the game is far from encyclopedic, but I don't recall "cocksucker" ever being used in Vice City and a quick google search turns up nothing. That said, I don't know of anyone who considers "cocksucker" to be "far worse" than "fuck"; at most, they're considered roughly the same level of vulgarity. I can't think of too many cases where "fuck" would be seen as acceptable language, but "cocksucker" would be crass. That all said, this is a meaningless side argument and you apparently completely missed my point with that statement if you think this in any way addresses what I was talking about. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/25/18 4:52:48 PM #200 | Kyuubi4269 posted... Again, absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. And the family actually got killed by ninja. Kyuubi4269 posted... moral of the story, don't make assertions without evidence of any kind. Yet you're doing the exact same thing. For instance, you're assuming that the TC is telling the truth and that the entire event wasn't just made up. Or that it didn't happen in a different way to what he said. Those are not unreasonable assumptions, but they are still assumptions. You have no objective evidence for them, yet you're fine with using them anyways. Kyuubi4269 posted... You can't change the deal then say the other person broke it lol You're sure loling a lot in this topic. You ever notice that? Are you not sure of your points or something? Anyways, I didn't break the deal. I literally invited you to go ahead and do it. Kyuubi4269 posted... You see, in the real world context matters, in fact you smeared your examples with context but don't see how that isn't apples for apples. Of course context matters. That's the whole point. If this guy had been, say, at his job on a construction site somewhere and done the same thing, it wouldn't have been a problem and unless he had some particularly devout co-workers, I doubt anyone would have objected to it. It's not that swearing is objectively evil and never allowed, it's that the context of what he did - swearing in front of some young kids - was bad. Kyuubi4269 posted... Tell that to Big Bang Theory tossing out bitches on breakfast TV. I've never seen Big Bang Theory, but I'm pretty sure it's not a kid's show. That and "bitch" generally isn't seen as quite as serious of a swear as "fuck" (even GTA didn't put an F-bomb in their games until San Andreas). Kyuubi4269 posted... Or perhaps TV is held to a higher standard than an idiot in a supermarket? Again, why? If it's totally OK for kids to hear swearing, why is not swearing considered "a higher standard"? That's like saying that politicians shouldn't eat papayas because they're being held to a higher standard - if eating papayas is OK, there's no reason why anyone should be barred from doing it. Kyuubi4269 posted... Unless you follow someone else's style guide, it's your decisions. If it's a style guide you came up with, it's not a "generally accepted" style guide, unless you happen to be one of a handful of people on the planet creating widely followed style guides. My occupation has me doing a lot of report-writing, so working to various style guides is something I'm intimately familiar with. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/25/18 4:52:45 PM #199 | Revelation34 posted... You flat out claimed they were thrown out. There was no information either way. I have literally never claimed the family was thrown out. I've been arguing the exact opposite of that for a while now. Do try to keep up. Revelation34 posted... There is no such thing as "burden of disproof" That is shit you made up. If you're not familiar with basic debate, I suppose that would seem like it's true. In reality, this has been around for quite a while. Russell's Teapot, which I alluded to earlier, is probably the most famous example. Revelation34 posted... Prove it. You made the claim first (Post 141), so I guess that means that by your rules the burden of proof is on you. Kyuubi4269 posted... Different situation, different responsibility. So what's different about it? If it's OK for kids to hear swearing, why does it make a difference if it's their teacher or some random guy in a supermarket? Kyuubi4269 posted... Based on current knowledge, sure. But if, somehow, a portal to the DC Universe existed and you just left said portal and hijacked this account, it would be 100% probable objectively. Based on what we know it is unlikely, but if that shit was true then isn't. What is objectively probable doesn't match what is probable to us if key truths are unknown. Sure. I don't disagree with any of this. But you've tacitly admitted to what I'm saying - just because two things are equally unprovable doesn't mean they are equally unlikely. Sure, in some alternate universe where superheroes are real, my claim might hold more weight. Even then, though, it wouldn't be true to say they were equally unlikely. For instance, let's take an example that's closer to the realm of possibility. Let's say that I'm actually claiming to be the TC's friend who got tossed out of the bar and I'll use that to back up my assertions. Is it possible? Sure. As unproven as the statement that I'm not the TC's friend? Of course. But are those two statements equally unlikely? No. In fact, absent any proof to the contrary, a rational person would probably assume I'm lying through my teeth if I tried to make that claim. In essence, you're assuming that I'm not the TC's friend and even though that assumption is unproven and founded on no verifiable facts, the burden of proof is still mine to prove otherwise if I want to make that claim. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/25/18 3:07:11 PM #194 | Kyuubi4269 posted... She initiated so she is responsible. He initiated the situation by swearing in front of her kids. The fact that said swears weren't directed at the family doesn't mean he didn't kick the whole thing off (the same way that if I cut in front of someone in line, even though I'm not directly confronting them at that point I'm still initiating a confrontation). Kyuubi4269 posted... Had the woman slapped him across the face and spat on him then that response would have ended it, but she was still the aggressor I'm.... honestly not sure what you're even trying to prove with this point. Had she slapped him and spat on him for that, that would be a disproportionate response, not to mention breaking several laws. Revelation34 posted... Nope. I never said anything about it except for "It sounded like he got in a fight with the husband so it was never about swearing that got him kicked out." I never said this actually happened and was after your claims anyway. In Post 163, you claimed "Actually he never said they weren't thrown out too. If they actually fought then they would have been thrown out too" in response to me pointing out that the family wasn't thrown out. I mean, if you're not accepting that the family was thrown out, fine, but that means you've been arguing about nothing for the last few posts. Revelation34 posted... You made the original claim that the family was never kicked out so even if I had actually said they weren't you would have to prove it because you made the original claim. If you're going to ignore the "burden of disproof" bullshit and sticking with the idea of "first post loses", I'll point out that the first response to this topic that actually addressed the subject claimed that the friend wasn't in the wrong. So I guess that means that the friend WAS in the wrong, until you can prove that he wasn't. Which you can't because something like that is entirely subjective and, therefore, impossible to prove. So... I win? Or are you ready to admit this is a really dumb line of logic? Again, I don't have to prove that something didn't happen (or, to put it another way, I don't have to disprove that something did happen). Logical arguments aren't constructed that way. Revelation34 posted... It would be valid if it was in pain. Pain is not a valid reason to get angry, unless it was caused by someone (which this instance wasn't). It is definitely not a valid reason to lose self-control. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/25/18 3:07:08 PM #193 | Kyuubi4269 posted... When neither have anything to support them, they're equally unproven. They are equally likely until further evidence is presented to support one or the other. Equally unproven, yes. Equally unlikely, no. I'm Superman. The comic books and movies are actually biopics of my life presented for the entertainment of the masses. There's my statement of claim. Based on the information available, you can neither prove nor disprove that I am Superman. The claim "I am Superman" and "I am not Superman" are both equally unproven, but they are very much not equally unlikely. Kyuubi4269 posted... The TC was there so his word carries weight. And, notably, he said nothing about the other family getting thrown out, even when talking about who WAS thrown out as part of this confrontation. Kyuubi4269 posted... However that claim is easily fact checked and ruled out immediately Said fact checking hasn't been done, so I'm afraid you'll still have to treat that claim as an equally valid possibility until you've gone out and interviewed the TC and the family in question to prove that they're still alive and weren't killed by ninja. Sorry. (You'd think something like that would be in the papers, but then again "absence of evidence" and all that...) Kyuubi4269 posted... Doing nothing isn't doing something, I can see how this is difficult for you. It's amazing how much I have to break this down, but fine. Saying "She didn't have to do anything" is saying that her actions were unconstrained by any requirements; following that up immediately with "She had to leave him alone" is suddenly putting a requirement on her. You're now saying she does have to do something, that something being "leave him alone and ignore him". That's not doing nothing. Kyuubi4269 posted... I made an apples for apples comparative example I could do for you, you failed to take the bet against your nonsense On the contrary, when you made your offer I told you to go ahead and swear at some kids if you thought that would help you. You never did (or if you did and got told off for it, you never posted as much) - if anyone bitched out, it was you. But go ahead, run this experiment a few times for us if you're really that desperate to prove yourself right in an internet argument. Keep in mind the hazards of small sample size, so I'll expect a statistically valid sampling if you want me to take you seriously on this. Kyuubi4269 posted... Schools aren't the real world lol So go in front of your boss's kids or a client's kids and swear at them. If you find yourself on a news show, start dropping F-bombs. Go to a fancy restaurant and start swearing loudly. In all of those cases, you'll pretty quickly be educated on what people think of crass language. There are situations where swearing is acceptable and situations where it isn't. In front of young kids is generally accepted as a situation where swearing is not acceptable, which is why kids movies do not have swears and footage aired for kids or in an environment where kids may be watching typically have the swears censored out. I mean, think about it for a second - if they're not bleeping those swears for kids, who do you think they're doing it for? Kyuubi4269 posted... "I disagree because I don't do it" lol So you don't know what a "style guide" is. Got it. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/25/18 1:54:18 PM #188 | Revelation34 posted... I love how you ignore that YOU were the one who even made that claim originally. The burden of proof is on you. Weird how that didn't apply in our earlier argument when that concept was working against you. But no, you're trying to stick me with a burden of disproof. You've constructed a fantasy situation where the family got tossed out and asking me to disprove that that happened. That's not how basic logic functions. Revelation34 posted... Nope. Pain is still pain. It isn't swearing at people. So you think it would be OK for a teacher in an elementary school to pepper her lessons with various fucks and shits as long as she wasn't directly addressing a student at the time? Again, most people have the emotional maturity to control when and where they swear and to bite their tongue if they're in an area where swearing would be inappropriate. Like in front of young children, for instance. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/25/18 1:50:00 PM #187 | Kyuubi4269 posted... Never happened lol Rev did and you seem to be supporting it. So which is it? Do you think the family got thrown out or not? Kyuubi4269 posted... Absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. There is no assumption, neither are appropriate to assume. So the family just exists in some quantum state of being both thrown out and not thrown out? Interesting idea, but one that doesn't gel with reality. Again, you seem to be labouring under the misunderstanding that both claims are equally valid; they're not. Sure, based on the information given, we cannot definitively say that the family was or wasn't tossed out, but that doesn't mean all possibilities are equally likely. For instance, what if I said the friend actually didn't get tossed out? Sure, the OP said he did, but maybe the TC was lying. So, really, it's equally likely that the friend stayed and the family was executed by a squad of ninja assassins that the friend was the grandmaster of, right? Sure, I have no evidence for anything in this paragraph, but as you just said absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. Kyuubi4269 posted... She didn't have to do anything, in fact she had to leave him alone. *claims woman didn't have to do anything before immediately claiming she had to do something* I think I'm starting to understand why you're having trouble with these issues regarding logical consistencies. Kyuubi4269 posted... a) Your morals aren't in line with your society a) It's kind of hilarious that you're ranting about improper assumptions up there, yet now you're talking about "my society" when you don't even know what society that is. Anyways, see my previous challenge from earlier in this topic: go into a school or onto a playground or somewhere where there's a lot of kids present and start swearing loudly. You might be interested to learn what society really believes. b) There's also something wrong with swearing in front of kids. There is a reason why teachers don't swear like pirates in front of their grade school students and why said students swearing will usually earn them a rebuke from the teacher. c) I politely disagree with your convention, as it is inconsistent with the generally-accepted style guides I typically use in my writing. Note how I was able to address your remark without flying off the handle and swearing at you and any children you may or may not have, because I am someone who has sufficient self control to not treat every request made of me by a stranger as a personal affront that requires a vitriolic response like an emotionally incontinent manchild. Had the friend responded to the woman's request by rolling his eyes, muttering "whatever", or even just doing nothing, he would have been fine; the fact that he felt the need to start raging at her AND insult her children - who, again, had absolutely no part in this argument - is what makes him a colossal asshole. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/25/18 1:04:55 PM #184 | Kyuubi4269 posted... Nah mate. I made claims to assert how undivulged information could sway either way and thus the unsubstantiated claims of your side are invalid. Except, again, two claims of "something did happen" and "something didn't happen" aren't equally valid. TC said his friend was tossed out, not the family that the friend was harassing. In that case, you claiming that the family was probably thrown out as well means that the burden of proof lies with you that it happened; since you have none, the default assumption is that the family remained. If I were to claim that the friend got in a fist fight with the family and you claimed that didn't happen, those two claims would not be equally valid, despite the fact that the OP does not mention whether a fist fight did or did not happen. It would be up to me to prove that a fist-fight happened, which I would be unable to do, so the default assumption is that no physical altercation took place. This really should not be that hard to comprehend. Kyuubi4269 posted... Also factual, had she not spoken, he would not have responded. Had he not sworn in front of a bunch of kids, she would not have spoken in the first place. Seriously, follow your lines of logic to their conclusion. Revelation34 posted... Nice try trying to weasel out of that one. Kind of like you've suddenly dropped your earlier claim that I was the first one to bring up whether or not getting angry over pain was justified right after I pointed out the exact post where you raised it as a point of discussion? Speaking of which... Revelation34 posted... There's nothing wrong with swearing in pain. a) Yes there is, if you're doing it in front of kids b) There's also nothing wrong with politely asking someone not to swear in front of children --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/25/18 10:28:57 AM #179 | Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted... .....did you actually read what you quoted? Kyuubi4269 posted... Oh so when you make claims it's merely as far as any of us know, but when anybody else does they're blowing shit out their ass? Dude, be consistent. I am. This is really just a Russell's Teapot argument. If you and Rev are trying to say that something did happen, despite there being no mention of it in the TC, then the burden of proof that it happened lies with you. You're attempting to push the burden of disproof on me, which is not how this works. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/24/18 11:48:51 PM #174 | Kyuubi4269 posted... What context makes unsubstantiated claims true? See below. Revelation34 posted... You flat out claimed that they weren't kicked out either. And they weren't, at least so far as any of us know, because the OP pointedly only mentioned his friend getting tossed. jerky_666 posted... It's really just come down to a few asinine blowhards trying to save face by having the last word while not realizing both sides of this argument were rendered fucking stupid by their very own bullshit. Exactly. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/24/18 6:33:46 PM #168 | Revelation34 posted... Show me one single post of SonnerAnarchy saying they didn't get kicked out too. Show me a post where SonnerAnarchy said the store owner didn't apologize profusely to them and offer them free merchandise, while the entire store applauded the husband for standing up to a raging asshole. I guess I can play this game too. Kyuubi4269 posted... Excuse me? I mean, I guess if you carefully excise parts of posts and strip them of all context, it almost looks like something that might support your argument... --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/24/18 4:22:24 PM #165 | Revelation34 posted... Actually he never said they weren't thrown out too. If they actually fought then they would have been thrown out too. Kyuubi4269 posted... Or they can kick out a couple dudes fuss free but they might end up in the news if they kicked out a family with a small child. Your shifting arguments are adorable, but if you two have gotten to the point where you're flat-out making shit up in the hopes that it'll bolster your case, I think we're pretty much done here. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/24/18 9:21:38 AM #162 | Revelation34 posted... darkknight109 posted...Except I didn't. Read it again. Weird how the other family wasn't thrown out as well then given that they also participated in the 'escalated' confrontation, isn't it? It's almost like the store acknowledged that him swearing at the woman and her kids was what started the whole mess and threw him out for it. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/23/18 4:27:18 PM #159 | AbsoluteDenial posted... You guys are still arguing? Your debate is just looking worse as it continues and serves as nothing but a waste of time for both of you. But someone is wrong on the internet and I cannot allow that to stand! --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/23/18 4:12:25 PM #157 | Revelation34 posted... You really didn't. You're blatantly ignoring what the person who it happened to stated. Except I didn't. Read it again. Revelation34 posted... You made the original claim You mean in Post #141? Because that wasn't me. Revelation34 posted... so it would be on you to back it up since that's how burden of proof works. I guess the coin still hasn't dropped. Keep working on it - you'll get it sooner or later! --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/23/18 2:02:17 PM #155 | Revelation34 posted... Nope. You're just flat out wrong. Its actually really funny you're claiming he was kicked out for the swearing when the actual thread creator said why they got kicked out. Which I've already explained multiple times. If you're not seeing it now, you're being deliberately obtuse. Revelation34 posted... No you actually did. And now we've devolved to the "no, u" school of debate. I note it still hasn't dawned on you why your challenge is such a dumb ask. Keep thinking, it'll come to you. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/23/18 9:12:01 AM #153 | Revelation34 posted... Here's what you seem to be too blind to read "The husband got involved, long story short, it escalated and we got kicked out of the store" Here's the part of my post that you seem to blind to read: "He swore at the family, which started an argument that he was ultimately asked to leave for." Again, note that the other people in this confrontation were not asked to leave. If it was just what happened afterwards that the store objected to, they would logically throw both parties out. They didn't, which suggests that they saw the other family as in the right, which suggests they believe that it was the friend's initial comment that was out of line and that started the dispute. Revelation34 posted... Prove it. Prove that it is. You brought it up in the first place. As you're contemplating that, you might realise why that's a really dumb challenge to try and make to that point. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/22/18 11:02:29 AM #150 | Revelation34 posted... You claimed he was kicked out for swearing. You clearly didn't. He was. He swore at the family, which started an argument that he was ultimately asked to leave for. Notably, the family was not asked to leave, which implies that the store decided that it was his original actions that started the dispute that were out of line. I thought that was pretty easily understood, but apparently I'm overestimating you. Revelation34 posted... Pain is painful https://media1.tenor.com/images/b93ee112b34ff9cd6f7120d16e204147/tenor.gif?itemid=5518795 Revelation34 posted... and is valid reason to get angry No, it's not. It's pretty much the farthest thing from a valid reason to get angry. Like, seriously, what the fuck. If you get angry because of every stubbed toe or bumped head, you have issues because you are getting angry at something that is nobody's fault and for which anger will not in any way improve the situation. Grow up and learn some emotional control. wwinterj25 posted... So now you're saying the guy shouted at the kids? Reading is hard. Harder for some of us than others, apparently. "He then said, 'fuck you and your ugly ass children.'" It helps to read the whole post before responding. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/21/18 2:09:07 AM #139 | Revelation34 posted... Nah you definitely aren't. Agreed. Except for the parts where I am. Which is all of it. Revelation34 posted... Good luck controlling your swearing while angry. I am fairly confident in saying that the number of times in my life that I've sworn without meaning to could be counted on one hand. The last time I can think of happened when I was a teenager, which was several decades ago. As for controlling swearing while angry... well, I can't actually remember the last time I was legitimately angry. If that's a recurring problem for you, there are courses for that you might want to look at attending. More to the point, a random injury doesn't cause me to get angry, let alone so angry that I can no longer control what words are coming out of my mouth. If it does for you... well, see aforementioned comment about courses you might want to take. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/21/18 1:22:52 AM #136 | Cacciato posted... Thats pretty fucking stupid and your grandpa sounds like a piece of shit. By today's standards, yeah, that's pretty awful behaviour. Back then it was completely normal and accepted. Swears were for private conversation or when the only ones present were adult men of not particularly polite company; if you swore in front of a woman or a child, you'd be in a fight pretty quickly. Kinda makes you second-guess pining for the "good old days", doesn't it? Revelation34 posted... There's a difference between saying a random swear word in pain and swearing at people. You can never be an asshole for swearing in pain. "Asshole" perhaps was a bit strong a word for it, but it's still bad manners and it's something that's going to upset people. Seriously, it's not hard to control your language in public. If someone can't avoid swearing when little kids are around, they are either mentally incapable of doing so, in which case they have a staggering lack of maturity and emotional control, or they are capable but have chosen not to, in which case they're a selfish prick. Revelation34 posted... You clearly never even read the original post. Weird how I'm responding to the details in it then, isn't it? --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Would you buy the house in this scenario? |
| darkknight109 07/20/18 1:13:15 PM #4 | Dynalo posted... Thoughts? Would you help out a family member in this situation? Depends very much on the family member. Money can really screw up relationships, so you are right to be leery of this. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/20/18 2:49:04 AM #80 | InhumaneRaider posted... He just strained his back, couple that with some random ass stranger telling you to, "mind your language," I'd tell her off as well. Except she didn't say that. She just said there were children present. Which is about as mild a "rebuke" as I can think of. InhumaneRaider posted... Fuck off with that, "back in the day", bullshit. If your granddad was punching people for using swear words, he's the one with the problem. Take it up with GenericGuy, he's the one who was talking about "how humanity is falling". The only reason I brought up that point at all was as a reminder of what exactly "the glory days" actually looked like. wwinterj25 posted... I agree. The mum sticking her nose in where it wasn't wanted was arsehole move. She deserved all she got after that. And the kids? What exactly did they do that warranted getting shouted at by a grown-ass man with anger issues? --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/20/18 12:25:04 AM #75 | Kyuubi4269 posted... The lesson taught was if you go bothering strangers on their morals, even if you're right, you'll both not solve the problem and get insults hurled your way. Is it really so hard to just leave people alone? Kyuubi4269 posted... They are, and every generation proceeding does as laws get tighter and tighter and people grow less and less tolerant. So if I square these two statements, you're basically saying that kids are spoiled and less tolerant of dissent and therefore we should teach them that bad behaviour is not challenged in the adult world and they are free to say and do what they please? Because that's one fucked up lesson right there. Kyuubi4269 posted... Live and let live man, ain't no one else's shit your business. True in private, not in public. I mean, if I cut in front of you in line at the market, you have good reason to call me an asshole and take me to task for my behaviour. I may not have done anything to physically harm you, nor have I broken any laws, but I'm still behaving badly and most people would recognize that and respond, not roll over and take it. Kyuubi4269 posted... You do have to be in a position of authority to modify another's behaviour. Being a fucking stranger, she was in no position to demand anything of him and had no reason to believe she held such authority. She didn't "demand" anything; all she said was "Excuse me, there are children here." That's, at most, a polite request for him to change his language. If she'd demanded he apologize to her and her kids, I could understand the hostility (though attacking the kids, who did nothing, is still being a raging jackass), but that was not the language she used. wwinterj25 posted... The guy was in pain and irritated no doubt. My uncle quit smoking a few years ago and, like most addicts going through withdrawl, was crankier than a sleep-deprived grizzly; he wound up going to a bar, said the wrong thing to the wrong people, and got a black eye for his troubles. In the months after that happened, he looked back on the whole ordeal (and the bar incident in particular) as rather enlightening. He was fond of saying afterwards, "No one knows the shit you're going through and much less do they care." No one is responsible for your bad day except you. You are not owed any preferential treatment or consideration because something shitty has happened to you. Yeah, the guy's back was strained and he was in pain... and maybe the mother hadn't got any sleep last night because one of her kids was up all night puking. Doesn't make a difference - at the end of the day, don't be an asshole and we'll all be better off. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/20/18 12:07:22 AM #74 | GenericGuy posted... _AdjI_ posted...Kyuubi4269 posted...darkknight109 posted...Yes, he was wrong. "How far humanity has fallen"? Really? You don't know how swearing used to be treated, do you? Here, I'll give you an idea - when he was a young man my grandfather used to haul off and punch people if they had the audacity to swear in front of women or children, and that response was considered completely acceptable, if a bit heavy-handed. Back then, swears were literal "fighting words" and using them in public was an open invitation for a beating. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/19/18 3:13:03 PM #40 | Kyuubi4269 posted... If somebody lets slip a naughty word and you feel the need to chastise them, expect to be slagged off for sticking your nose where it's not wanted. So basically you're saying that A is allowed to say something that B doesn't want to hear, but B isn't allowed to say something that A doesn't want to hear. Go back through that slowly... you sure you don't see any logical inconsistencies in there somewhere? Not even a teeny tiny one? Kyuubi4269 posted... He didn't get tossed out for saying "fuck" picking shit up. No, he got tossed for swearing at her and insulting her kids (who, it should be noted, did absolutely nothing to deserve that kind of treatment from a grown-ass man). Kyuubi4269 posted... She is still wrong to provoke a stranger and teach bad lessons all round to her kids. Right, "stand up for yourself" and "don't swear in public like a troglodyte" are horrible lessons to teach kids. Goodness knows I want my kids to know that if they behave badly everyone will give them wide berth and not raise a whisper of objection. Random aside, but you're not one of those people who thinks the kids of this generation are being too spoiled and mollycoddled, are you? Kyuubi4269 posted... I don't care about chasing SJW ideals, I just want you to shut up. Well you're definitely going about that the wrong way, I can tell you that right now. Also, apparently "be nice to people" and "make the world a better place" are SJW things now. Damn this PC culture, amirite? Everyone should do their best to make people miserable and tell it like it is- Wait, isn't that exactly what the woman did here? And it's the anti-SJW crowd who's always complaining about not being able to say what they want whenever they want? Man, what a paradox! It's almost like this whole argument is constructed of bullshit. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/19/18 12:39:58 PM #29 | Kyuubi4269 posted... She had the right, just as he had the right to swear. I'm failing to see how these two sentences line up. The first sentence states that they both had equal rights to their actions. Which is true. But the second sentence implies that he was perfectly in the clear for swearing in front of some kids, but she was wrong for (politely) taking issue with it. Seriously, what the fuck. If you act like an asshole, expect people to take exception to that, and them taking you to task for it does not make you any less of an asshole. Kyuubi4269 posted... she interfered because she's thinks she can mother everyone just because she has kids. She can't, she can fuck off. Clearly she can, because she wasn't the one that got tossed out of the store. Kyuubi4269 posted... If you really insist, I'm headed past a supermarket later, I could perhaps film doing exactly what he did and the lack of comments following? By all means, go swear at some kids if you think it'll make the world a better place. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/19/18 11:54:14 AM #25 | InhumaneRaider posted... darkknight109 posted...Kyuubi4269 posted...darkknight109 posted...Yes, he was wrong. As mentioned above, it's generally considered bad manners to swear around kids. If you don't understand the problem, I'll repeat my challenge. Go head over to a playground or some other place where there's lots of kids and their parents present, start swearing loudly and see how long it takes before someone comes over to have a friendly chat with you about it. InhumaneRaider posted... She was literally trying to police his language. All she did was - rather politely, I might add - mention that there were kids present. She didn't even say anything like "watch your language", or something similar. And that's apparently justification for TC's friend to swear at her and call her kids ugly? Fuck me, have we really reached that point as a society where making a polite request to someone is now considered an act of war? --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/19/18 11:02:08 AM #22 | Kyuubi4269 posted... darkknight109 posted...Yes, he was wrong. Sure she was. She absolutely has the right to comment on bad behaviour if she sees it; it's not like she tried to punch him or anything. You can't even argue that doing so is bad manners, because the TC's friend was the one who displayed bad manners in the first place by swearing in a public place. If you disagree, I invite you to go into the nearest department store, head over to the deepest concentration of customers and staff and start loudly swearing, then watch what happens. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | My friend told a woman, "fuck her and her ugly ass children." |
| darkknight109 07/19/18 8:30:33 AM #10 | Yes, he was wrong. Generally it's considered bad manners to swear around kids (yes, even in a public space). All she was asking for was for him to mind his manners and he followed it up with an insult. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Which of these SNES classic games should I play next |
| darkknight109 07/19/18 8:28:07 AM #12 | Mario RPG. It's simplistic, as RPGs go, but is still all kinds of awesome. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Trump is a traitor to his own country. |
| darkknight109 07/19/18 1:53:13 AM #146 | OhhhJa posted... SKARDAVNELNATE posted...Why is the US at odds with Russia? It seems like the 2 countries would be excellent allies against the wave of religious extremists in that corner of the world. The US did the same with Saddam Hussein back in the day. The only problem with it was when a subsequent administration went after him for doing what he was put in power to do. Which in turn allowed the current situation to develop. Yeah, no clue whatsoever. Other than the fact that they illegally annexed Crimea. That's kind of a shit move. Or the fact that they invaded Eastern Ukraine and have continued to wage an insurrectionist campaign to destabilize the country. Oh yeah, and as part of that they kind of shot down a passenger jet and killed about 300 innocent civilians, before getting the missile launcher that did it right the fuck out of dodge and denying all responsibility. Which is, you know, bad. Oh, and there was that time they invaded Georgia. Or the time they propped up a murderous dictator in Syria that's killed six figures of his own population. Well.. I say "the time", but that implies it isn't still going on. Or that thing a few months ago where they poisoned a couple of ex-spies on British soil and that same toxin just killed someone else. That's all pretty shitty, and probably not something that should be supported or accepted. Hmm... what else, what else.... I think that's got most of it... Oh yeah! There's that whole thing about them interfering in the last US presidential election (among others) and launching a sophisticated disinformation campaign to ferment discord amongst the voters, disrupt election infrastructure, push forward their own favoured candidates, and generally destabilize things. But, you know, what's a little digital warfare among friends, amirite? Clearly this whole thing is just water under the bridge, even though it's been going on practically nonstop for the past decade. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Y/N: Oxford Comma |
| darkknight109 07/18/18 12:39:43 PM #3 | YOUHAVENOHOPE posted... I don't think either way is technically "correct" I think it's up to personal preference Most style guides have it as optional. That said, not using it has resulted in legal troubles before. https://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2018/02/10/Dairy-to-pay-workers-5M-because-of-missing-comma/5041518290082/ I personally always use it. Not using it leaves things ambiguous and while that's usually not a major issue, in some rare cases (like that story above) it does make a difference. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | What do you hate the most about other drivers? |
| darkknight109 07/18/18 12:14:56 PM #29 | SunWuKung420 posted... Bad mergers, people who use ending lanes to cut people off, people who can't wait their turn in line. This. People who are bad at merging are just the worst. 1) Do not stop at a merge sign. Merge means speed up to the same speed as the traffic flow you're joining, find a spot, and smoothly merge in. If you slow down or stop, the entire system breaks down, you risk being rear-ended, and everyone stuck behind you will hate you. 2) By the same token, do not attempt to merge at a yield sign. Yield sign means the lane of traffic you are approaching has the right of way, so approach cautiously, check to make sure there are no other cars coming, and do not proceed if there are. Yield lanes are frequently too short to merge safely and other drivers may not be expecting you to make the attempt, so don't be an idiot. And finally, by far the most frequently misunderstood rule of merging: 3) If you are merging into slow traffic, you are supposed to use the entire merge lane, not try to merge into traffic halfway through. If you use the entire lane and merge at the end, it creates a single point of entry, thus allowing cars to smoothly alternate between merging traffic and existing traffic. If you just pick a random spot, someone behind you can just zip past you and continue to the end of the lane, slowing you and everyone behind you down. On a related note, don't be that asshole that goes flying down the merge lane while everyone else is crawling along - yes, Mr. Important, I'm sure you have somewhere exceedingly critical to be, but you're going to be stuck going the same speed as the rest of us in a few seconds and scrambling to try to secure a place as far forward in the line as possible is not going to save you more than 20 seconds and makes you look like an enormous jackass. Proceed to the end of the lane at a reasonable pace, not more than 10-20 kmh faster than the traffic you're going to be merging in with. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Which of these 2d zelda games are the best |
| darkknight109 07/17/18 12:36:53 PM #35 | Link's Awakening. Best story and atmosphere of the 2D Zeldas by far and pretty solid dungeons too. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | What are your top 3 GameCube games and why? |
| darkknight109 07/17/18 8:06:08 AM #57 | Sahuagin posted... darkknight109 posted...This is so wrong I don't even know how to respond to it. Off the top of my head, there's: Phantasy Star Online: Episodes I and II Rogue Squadron II: Rogue Leader Both of the Baten Kaitos games Ikaruga Both of the Sonic Adventure games if you missed them on other platforms Pikmin Sonic Riders Tales of Symphonia --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | What are your top 3 GameCube games and why? |
| darkknight109 07/17/18 3:50:29 AM #53 | Sahuagin posted... sad thing is, that's almost all the games on the whole system that are worth playing... This is so wrong I don't even know how to respond to it. If you seriously think that's all that's worth playing on the GC, you missed out on some gems. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Crushed Ice or Cubed Ice |
| darkknight109 07/14/18 12:56:18 AM #3 | No ice. Waters down the drink. Chill the glass instead, if need be. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | I'm gonna invade Antarctica |
| darkknight109 07/12/18 2:48:47 PM #7 | ParanoidObsessive posted... Keep in mind that every piece of Antarctica is already technically owned by someone else, so you should pick a slice that's under the control of some sad country you think you can beat in a war. Not actually true - there is one surprisingly large slice of Antarctica that has never been claimed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Byrd_Land That said, all countries with land claims on Antarctica (as well as the US, Russia, Brazil, and South Africa, which do not have any land claims but have granted themselves the right to make claims on it, including claims that overlap with existing land claims) are signatories to the Antarctic Treaty, under which all land claims are set aside (though, notably, not revoked altogether) and the land is recognized as a science preserve, held in trust for the Common Good of humanity. In essence, under the current treaty, Antarctica belongs to everyone and no one. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Goddamn the cost for traffic violations has gotten completely out of control |
| darkknight109 07/12/18 11:48:45 AM #153 | Kyuubi4269 posted... The speed limit is not inherently reasonable as all cars vary. And that variance is already taken into consideration in the design of the speed limit. In essence, the speed limit is the maximum speed you're supposed to be going under ideal circumstances. If there are other factors that would impact your ability to stop - bad road conditions, poor visibility, worn out brakes on your vehicle - you are supposed to drive slower than the speed limit. Hell, in theory cops can ticket you for dangerous driving even if you're going less than the speed limit if the conditions mean that travelling at the speed limit is unsafe (in practice, that particular law is seldom enforced, but it is on the books in most Western countries). Kyuubi4269 posted... If you want to take your "all parties are responsible" line to its logical conclusion, no car should be driven at a speed where a collision can bruise a pedestrian or scuff the car. That, again, is the idea. A speed limit is supposed to be the maximum speed where, if an obstacle were to appear on the road ahead, you would have sufficient time to stop without making contact with the obstacle. Kyuubi4269 posted... Speed limits and penalties aren't helpful, reckless driving is what should be enforced. The problem with "reckless driving" is that it's an entirely subjective charge, and that makes it widely open to interpretation, causing headaches on all sides. Drivers don't like it, because a cop having a bad day can accuse you of driving recklessly even though you weren't breaking any specific laws; similarly, cops don't like it because it's far easier to challenge in court, since it's relying primarily on the officer's own judgement. Hence why, in most nations I'm familiar with, reckless driving is only filed in the most extreme cases (e.g. driving >50km over the speed limit, instances where a collision occurred or the driver lost control of their vehicle, etc.) where there is almost no argument that the driver was being unsafe. Speed limits are much nicer that way, because they are a quantitative metric that is easily verified. Saying, "you took that corner too fast, so I'm charging you with reckless driving" is a pretty flimsy argument; saying, "the speed limit's 50 and you were doing 70" is much clearer. Kyuubi4269 posted... And to kill the responsibility line, you are responsible for your crashes even when you weren't at fault, you take responsibility by paying for crashes/insurance, it doesn't mandate you drive sensibly, only that you take responsibility for the results. Yes, paying for crashes/insurance doesn't mandate that you drive sensibly; that's why we have laws, including speed limit laws. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Goddamn the cost for traffic violations has gotten completely out of control |
| darkknight109 07/12/18 10:05:21 AM #151 | Kyuubi4269 posted... Animals are perfectly capable of jumping out in front of your car within your braking zone regardless of what speed you're travelling at, as are people. Yes, but there is a considerable difference in terms of what will happen to both you and the person/creature you hit depending on what speed you are travelling (and the effect is exponential, given that for every kmh faster you drive, you are simultaneously reducing the time you have to react and increasing the amount of time it will take to bring your car to a halt). And in terms of responsibility, remember that the cardinal rule of the road is "All parties are responsible for preventing accidents." Even if someone is not supposed to be in the middle of the road, it is up to you to do everything in your power to avoid hitting them, which includes driving at a reasonable rate of speed (aka under the speed limit). --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Goddamn the cost for traffic violations has gotten completely out of control |
| darkknight109 07/12/18 9:09:49 AM #149 | Kyuubi4269 posted... Cacciato posted...Kyuubi4269 posted...Speeding is only an issue with traffic. Except wildlife exists. As does weather. As do pedestrians (yes, even in remote rural areas - I grew up in a rural area and I can't even count the number of times I was driving home and nearly hit some drunk campers out for a midnight stroll). The entire point of a speed limit is to allow you sufficient time to react and stop your vehicle if something unexpected appears on the road ahead of you and I can't think of a single road where that would not be a pertinent concern. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | What are your top 3 GameCube games and why? |
| darkknight109 07/12/18 4:48:08 AM #26 | Some amazing stuff to choose from. If I had to pick three, I'd go with Melee (just an outstanding game and way ahead of its time), Phantasy Star Online (a bizarrely addicting MMO, despite the fact that it consisted of just eight dungeons, plus one more online), and Metroid Prime (a game that had no right to be good, yet somehow turned out to be fucking sensational). Runners up are F-Zero GX (probably my favourite racing game of all time), Tales of Symphonia (GC didn't have a lot of RPGs, but the ones it did have were really good), and Baten Kaitos Origins (as above). --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Goddamn the cost for traffic violations has gotten completely out of control |
| darkknight109 07/12/18 12:28:08 AM #127 | streamofthesky posted... I've never gotten a speeding ticket my whole life, but that's due to a combination of luck and avoiding driving as much as possible...because it's inevitably going to happen the more miles you drive. I've never got a speeding ticket in my life and I've put over a quarter million collective kilometres on my vehicles. Saying "it's inevitable" is not just wrong, but laughably so. It's posted right on the side of the road what you need to do to not get a ticket: don't let the little number on your dial go above the big number on the sign and you're golden. This is not nearly as difficult as you're making it out to be. streamofthesky posted... But the anxiety definitely has an effect. I'm always checking for cops in likely hiding spots, it's stressful, and the distraction of a cop camped out is way more likely to get me into an accident than my driving speed. Have you tried not speeding? Because that works pretty well for me. I don't need to worry about watching out for cops when I'm not doing anything for them to pull me over. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Topic | Goddamn the cost for traffic violations has gotten completely out of control |
| darkknight109 07/11/18 11:06:00 PM #120 | zebatov posted... I think you have that backwards. 21 km over is less than 21 miles. I was talking about the fines. A $600 fine for going 21 km over is a bit much, but if you're going 21 miles over that's about what I'd expect it to be. zebatov posted... But again, taking into account how many people do and make it home safe, very rarely by comparison. And 99.99% of the time when you drive you could go without a seatbelt and not suffer any harm. That still doesn't mean not wearing a seatbelt is a good idea (as evinced by the thousands of people who die each year in survivable crashes because they weren't buckled in). Seriously, this isn't hard. Don't drink and drive. Call a cab, call an uber, call a friend, have a designated driver, arrange to stay over, whatever. If you don't have a way to get home with a sober driver, then don't drink to excess. There are zero situations I can think of where you are required to get drunk and are then forced to drive somewhere. One (or more frequently both) are always voluntary actions. --- Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster. Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror! |
| Board List |
