Lankist, every time you argue in these threads, I always imagine it being something like that scene from Matrix reloaded with him battering away the agents jumping at him.
[editline]01:17AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=melonmonkey;17112135]I would say 5000 per year. There will allways be people who are simply inherently mentally unstable. It could fluctuate far in either direction, I personally have no idea how many people who are unhinged live in the united states, or the UK.
However, if there was a ban on videogames, would I give it up? Yes.
I would not let it pass without a fight, and I certainly wouldn't be happy about it, but if there was a 100% ban on video game playing I would stop.[/QUOTE]
That seems awfully arbitrary.
[QUOTE=melonmonkey;17112135]I would say 5000 per year. There will allways be people who are simply inherently mentally unstable. It could fluctuate far in either direction, I personally have no idea how many people who are unhinged live in the united states, or the UK.
However, if there was a ban on videogames, would I give it up? Yes.
I would not let it pass without a fight, and I certainly wouldn't be happy about it, but if there was a 100% ban on video game playing I would stop.[/QUOTE]
So that's 5000 people a year.
You are okay with 5000 men, women and children dying every year so you can play a stupid fucking video game.
So the fuck much for valuing human life. You are a sociopath.
[editline]08:18PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;17112145]That seems awfully arbitrary.[/QUOTE]
No, let him go on. Let him justify the murder of 5,000 people for his own useless, worthless amusement.
This thread reminds me of the state where suicide is punishable by death.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112142]My own little world is the entire world buddy. I have a law degree.
Child pornography is the recording, maintaining and (sometimes but not necessarily always) the distribution of media in which children are exposed to or partaking in sexual activity.
Nude children and statutory rape are different things.[/QUOTE]
There are laws relating to nude children though, right?
[QUOTE=melonmonkey;17112135]I would say 5000 per year. There will allways be people who are simply inherently mentally unstable. It could fluctuate far in either direction, I personally have no idea how many people who are unhinged live in the united states, or the UK.
However, if there was a ban on videogames, would I give it up? Yes.
I would not let it pass without a fight, and I certainly wouldn't be happy about it, but if there was a 100% ban on video game playing I would stop.[/QUOTE]
This statement made me sad.
[QUOTE=DeathFang;17112173]There are laws relating to nude children though, right?[/QUOTE]
There are not. Nude children in photography and media are legal if it is in a non-sexual and/or artistic context.
Pornography is defined as media with the sole and explicit purpose of sexual arousal.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112151]So that's 5000 people a year.
You are okay with 5000 men, women and children dying every year so you can play a stupid fucking video game.[/QUOTE]
No, I'm not. Not in the slightest. If I stopped playing video games, would it help? Most likely not. Video games are, however, not banned right now. If they were, I would immediatly quit.
When I came in to this arguement, I may have used the word "ban", but I should have said "remain banned".
ITT: People who think they can dictate what everyone else does.
Sorry, I like my freedom to do drugs, and I like the freedom to do whatever I want. If you restrict things that aren't harming others or properties, eventually you can ban anything and everything.
[QUOTE=melonmonkey;17112193]No, I'm not. Not in the slightest. If I stopped playing video games, would it help? Most likely not. Video games are, however, not banned right now. If they were, I would immediatly quit.
When I came in to this arguement, I may have used the word "ban", but I should have said "remain banned".[/QUOTE]
Then why the fuck would you fight against video games being banned?
It would save thousands of lives.
You should be fighting FOR a ban.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112190]There are not. Nude children in photography and media are legal if it is in a non-sexual and/or artistic context.
Pornography is defined as media with the sole and explicit purpose of sexual arousal.[/QUOTE]
Oh.
Ok I was wrong.
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;17111933]
But I'm saying that I value human life, even idiot human life, more than I do[B] a useless freedom[/B].[/QUOTE]
Ugh. People like you just make me cringe.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17111992]Yes.
Stephen signs Obama's checks. Obama answers to Stephen. Obama has no place telling Steve what to do.[/QUOTE]
Don't the fuck call me Steve.
But in all seriousness I'm trying to find a response to this.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17111965]I do not vote.
The fact that you just called individual liberty useless signifies to me you honestly do not deserve it.[/QUOTE]
As far as voting goes, I really wouldn't expect that of you. Jesus man seriously?
As far as individual liberty goes, I said a [I]useless[/I] individual liberty was useless. Freedom of speech isn't useless. Freedom of religion is a necessity. If you go to stupidlaws.com and read that you can't stuff a lantern up a camel's ass in the state of Wyoming, do you rage? It's a stupid law, it's a waste of government money, and it's just something I made the fuck up on the spot, but it's [I]useless.[/I]
On how many deaths entails outlawing, because I'm too lazy to quote, isn't banning video games a worse thing for the government to do than to outlaw seatbeltlessness? Furthermore, a useless freedom warrants how many deaths?
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112151]So that's 5000 people a year.
You are okay with 5000 men, women and children dying every year so you can play a stupid fucking video game.
So the fuck much for valuing human life. You are a sociopath.
[editline]08:18PM[/editline]
No, let him go on. Let him justify the murder of 5,000 people for his own useless, worthless amusement.[/QUOTE]
The real question is, how hard is it to buckle your seatbelt? How hard is it to make sure drunk drivers never get back on the road? How hard is it to outlaw drug use so users don't create crime in order to get their next fix.
Now watch this lankist, two months from now you'll be arguing against this point, just for the sake of arguing. Arguing is great an all, but only if you have a real point that needs to be heard, you're just a flippant elitest arrogrant prick who can't help but say "I'M A LAWYER". Every single thread i've seen you argue in, you seem to ask "WHAT'S YOUR JOB?" "WELL IM A LAWYER".
And yes, video games aren't useless. Certainly not at the level of being able to not wear a seat belt is useless. I'm sort of biased in that field though because I haven't played video games in ages.
Fucking internet.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112151]So that's 5000 people a year.
You are okay with 5000 men, women and children dying every year so you can play a stupid fucking video game.
So the fuck much for valuing human life. You are a sociopath.
[editline]08:18PM[/editline]
No, let him go on. Let him justify the murder of 5,000 people for his own useless, worthless amusement.[/QUOTE]
So on that basis, anything which could kill a single person should be banned? Since we value human life so much?
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;17112247]As far as voting goes, I really wouldn't expect that of you. Jesus man seriously?[/QUOTE]
The right to abstain is just as important as the right to vote.
I hold politicians to a higher standard. I do not vote against, I vote for, and there has yet to be a politician or a party that I approve of.
[editline]08:25PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Camundongo;17112266]So on that basis, anything which could kill a single person should be banned? Since we value human life so much?[/QUOTE]
Exactly.
If human life is always more important than freedom, you can justify banning ANYTHING.
Drawing arbitrary lines just invalidates the argument.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112209]Then why the fuck would you fight against video games being banned?
It would save thousands of lives.
You should be fighting FOR a ban.[/QUOTE]
Your logic is sound. I concede defeat :worship:
[QUOTE=Oecleus;17112251]The real question is, how hard is it to buckle your seatbelt? How hard is it to make sure drunk drivers never get back on the road? How hard is it to outlaw drug use so users don't create crime in order to get their next fix.
Now watch this lankist, two months from now you'll be arguing against this point, just for the sake of arguing. Arguing is great an all, but only if you have a real point that needs to be heard, you're just a flippant elitest arrogrant prick who can't help but say "I'M A LAWYER". Every single thread i've seen you argue in, you seem to ask "WHAT'S YOUR JOB?" "WELL IM A LAWYER".[/QUOTE]
Are you illiterate?
I have never contradicted my stance on individual rights, ever.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112275]The right to abstain is just as important as the right to vote.
I hold politicians to a higher standard. I do not vote against, I vote for, and there has yet to be a politician or a party that I approve of.[/QUOTE]
TY motherfucker.
It occurred to me recently that I'll be able to vote for the first time in the 2012 election and I may not at all.
God damn I have like 20 tabs and they're all this thread.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17112308]TY motherfucker.
It occurred to me recently that I'll be able to vote for the first time in the 2012 election and I may not at all.[/QUOTE]
How old are you Johnny?
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17112308]TY motherfucker.
It occurred to me recently that I'll be able to vote for the first time in the 2012 election and I may not at all.[/QUOTE]
Motherfuckers keep saying people who don't vote can't complain.
People who don't vote are the only people who have room to complain. We aren't responsible for any of the political fuckups.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112304]Are you illiterate?
I have never contradicted my stance on individual rights, ever.[/QUOTE]
But you probably have contradicted your views on other issues, just for the sake of arguing. You could be arguing against yourself and fill up 10 pages easily.
Respond to the other half of my post; you know, the one with content.
[QUOTE=Lankist;17112326]Motherfuckers keep saying people who don't vote can't complain.
People who don't vote are the only people who have room to complain. We aren't responsible for any of the political fuckups.[/QUOTE]
Stop being 100% correct all the time
[QUOTE=Oecleus;17112251]The real question is, how hard is it to buckle your seatbelt? How hard is it to make sure drunk drivers never get back on the road? How hard is it to outlaw drug use so users don't create crime in order to get their next fix.
Now watch this lankist, two months from now you'll be arguing against this point, just for the sake of arguing. Arguing is great an all, but only if you have a real point that needs to be heard, you're just a flippant elitest arrogrant prick who can't help but say "I'M A LAWYER". Every single thread i've seen you argue in, you seem to ask "WHAT'S YOUR JOB?" "WELL IM A LAWYER".[/QUOTE]
"No guys, like charges attract"
"No they don't you stupid fuck"
"Who the hell are you to correct me."
"I'M A GODDAMN PARTICLE PHYSICIST FUCKWIT"
I'd be pissed too that some kid on the internet thinks he knows more than you about your own profession you've been studying years to do
[QUOTE=Oecleus;17112334]But you probably have contradicted your views on other issues, just for the sake of arguing. You could be arguing against yourself and fill up 10 pages easily.
Respond to the other half of my post; you know, the one with content.[/QUOTE]
Find an instance, in context, where I did that.
The only time I argue against my views is like five seconds ago when I am humoring an illogical argument. And if you aren't illiterate you'll realize I am fighting a notion from the inside out.
[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;17112321]How old are you Johnny?[/QUOTE]
17
[QUOTE=T2L_Goose;17112321]How old are you Johnny?[/QUOTE]
17 I believe
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17112342]"No guys, like charges attract"
"No they don't you stupid fuck"
"Who the hell are you to correct me."
"I'M A GODDAMN PARTICLE PHYSICIST FUCKWIT"
I'd be pissed too that some kid on the internet thinks he knows more than you about your own profession you've been studying years to do[/QUOTE]
He brings it up it nearly every thread. What we are discussing right now has nothing to do with his profession, and no one denied such a non-controversial topic in such a arrogant insulting way.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17112353]17[/QUOTE]
Christ you are my age. I'm ashamed that someone so smart has existed as long as I have.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
