shitty laws stopped people returning fire and preventing a massacre
Reality: People on the scene returned fire and prevented a massacre.
Really, of all the fucking examples of 'innocent disarmed victims' available you had to go full retard on the one occasion nobody was innocent, people were armed and there were no fatal victims.
Preventing killing. A lot of gun owners don't buy them to shoot, let alone kill anything. They buy them because they perceive the need to have the threat of lethal violence in order to protect themselves.
Well, I've only read the top comment in this thread and its replies, and I must be fucking illiterate because I don't see anybody dismissing nazi crimes.
I do see a number of people telling you that you're illiterate though.
I'm a diagnosed retard, the NHS put it in writing for me. Who's put it in writing that you're an illiterate cunt?
Shouting over someone to prevent them being heard is something I find reprehensible. Telling someone they're a miserable ignorant cunt I find perfectly acceptable. I may disagree, the speaker may lose credibility, there may be ridicule for the lack of constructive argument, but that's a continuation of the discourse.
Both are bad manners, and it could be tricky to legislate to prevent one and not the other.
Let alone when you start looking at shit like Emma Sulkowicz, who made an entire fucking career out of fucking over an innocent man.
Title IX is ostensibly a good thing. The "Dear Colleague" letter that threatened the funding for colleges that didn't use it to fuck over their male students is horrific and causing massive damage to men and their lives.
I don't want women to be assaulted. I don't think Title IX protects women at all and protecting women is not an excuse to destroy the education and prospects of men.
Thing is, I haven't seen anybody in this entire fucking discussion sympathise with the Nazis.
You're throwing random accusations around and using those to justify violence against the people you're accusing. That doesn't make them a nazi, that makes you a cunt.
Remind me, when was anal sex A - Required to be performed by anybody by law B - Required for a gay relationship C - Required for someone to be gay whether in a relationship or not
Finding anal sex icky is not and never was a justification for persecuting homosexuals, so why would you suggest it's a reason in Uganda?
Fuck me it's like arguing with a child. You're failing to comprehend basic concepts and projecting your own interpretations onto me.
As a basic example, you keep telling me what May says and that I believe it. I don't give a fuck what May says and I don't agree with much of her approach or policy. Your entire base is a swamp of misunderstanding, false assumption and crackpot analysis.
I can't be arsed trying to educate you, you don't want to listen and you lack the basic intelligence to comprehend.
So to close this off: a referendum on the proposed deal would be fucking insane because it would prevent us negotiating a good deal. Just fucking accept it or find an adult with the patience to teach you.
So effectively you're saying that you dislike the idea of more democracy, because you don't have faith in Theresa May's ability to act as an effective negotiator
No I am not. It doesn't matter how good a negotiator you are, if the other side knows that they get everything they want (including humiliating you) by not negotiating then it's not a negotiation anyway.
That has fuck all to do with democracy. Telling the EU "avoid agreeing a deal and we will have a referendum on whether to accept your imposed terms" gives them carte blanche to impose whatever the fuck they want.
That is why it's not a democratic approach. It's denying the British public a chance of a deal that's good for Britain and removes the option of just walking away and accepting wto terms.
Shit, 85% of the general election votes went to parties promising a robust negotiation and no second referendum, is that democratic enough for you?
I'd guess not, apparently democracy means you getting what you want and fuck the rest of us.
Their stance is that people be allowed a second referendum once the terms of the deal is clear.
A stance guaranteed to prevent any deal at all, as the EU would immediately refuse anything that might be acceptable as a deal.
They will try anyway, which is why the ability to leave without a deal is essential; without that the UK has no negotiating position.
implies that you know deep down there's a real chance people could reject Brexit if given a second chance to decide the issue
Allow me to clarify: I think a second referendum on leaving the EU would be a bigger vote out now than the one last year.
I think a referendum on the terms of a deal with the EU is a blatant and unsubtle attempt to prevent us leaving at all, and disrespectful to the views of both remain and leave voters.
that's being an anti-democratic authoritarian shit head
I think you'll find that she just got humiliated in a general election.
Hmm. I think it's possible to articulate a Brexit policy that respects the views and desires of everybody.
It might not make them happy but it can at least acknowledge the legitimacy of their views, the validity of their concerns and the challenges of finding optimal outcomes for everybody.
The Conservatives are strictly committed to the union though, so couldn't countenance allowing Scotland to commit economic suicide like that.
The SNP had better get nowhere near being in the UK government anyway. They act like spiteful racist little shits and I'm glad they lost half their seats.
It may be an informal coalition; DUP agree to vote with the Conservatives on key legislation but don't help form the government.
I think that'd be excellent. I think a Conservative government was necessary for a clean Brexit, but a weak one that can't push through its obnoxious authoritarian puritan policies is bloody excellent news.
I think it's because Timmy Fallon is a whinging child and not a credible leader.
The lack of trust following their brief stint in government will be a factor but in the past two years they've been terrible at demonstrating any ability to work towards improving the country.
Their stance on Brexit utterly fails to respect the British people, their communication of policies has managed to pass me completely by and their position on any national issue is "those evil Tories/racists/nasty people want to take away our toys".
Yes, that article genuinely positions the gender disparity in higher education as unfairly impacting on women because they can't all date equally educated men.
I'd use ASCII art to show my empathy levels here but couldn't think of a good representation of 0K.
If you can't program, you're not a software engineer.
That's ok, you can be a business analyst, a project manager, a tester, an artist, a designer.
But you want to be a software engineer? Write quality code. Sure, do a ton of shit alongside that, including scary amounts of communication, but if you can't code, get another fucking job.
I'm not surrounded by men and I've been hit upon by men. I've had women make unwanted propositions to me too.
I've also made approaches to women that have resulted in rejection, so I've caused them to incur unwanted propositions.
What, you want everybody to stop trying to fuck each other? I mean, I support the end of humanity that this would cause, but I think I'm in a minority here.
We all know exactly what he actually said. You're the one claiming he had a subtext.
Others have highlighted a number of possible interpretations for the reported perceptions. So far you're the only person to posit that the women are lying.
Slashdot Mirror
metal gear old gay cowboy space marine never ending soap opera crap
Which game was that? Sounds interesting at least.
You, paraphrased:
shitty laws stopped people returning fire and preventing a massacre
Reality: People on the scene returned fire and prevented a massacre.
Really, of all the fucking examples of 'innocent disarmed victims' available you had to go full retard on the one occasion nobody was innocent, people were armed and there were no fatal victims.
Truly a debating masterclass, thank you.
It's pretty fucking high powered compared to .22 pistol
- a bb gun
- a longbow
- a slingshot
- a
No, it's not an elephant gun, a.50 sniper rifle or a General Electric GAU-8/A Avenger. I'd still really rather he didn't fucking shoot me with it.
What use does a gun have except for killing?
Preventing killing. A lot of gun owners don't buy them to shoot, let alone kill anything. They buy them because they perceive the need to have the threat of lethal violence in order to protect themselves.
Well, I've only read the top comment in this thread and its replies, and I must be fucking illiterate because I don't see anybody dismissing nazi crimes.
I do see a number of people telling you that you're illiterate though.
I'm a diagnosed retard, the NHS put it in writing for me. Who's put it in writing that you're an illiterate cunt?
Interesting challenge.
Shouting over someone to prevent them being heard is something I find reprehensible.
Telling someone they're a miserable ignorant cunt I find perfectly acceptable. I may disagree, the speaker may lose credibility, there may be ridicule for the lack of constructive argument, but that's a continuation of the discourse.
Both are bad manners, and it could be tricky to legislate to prevent one and not the other.
So where's the evidence that it's reduced sexual assaults? There's plenty of evidence that it's ruined more than very few men's lives.
Random search result immediately returns..
https://www.insidehighered.com...
Let alone when you start looking at shit like Emma Sulkowicz, who made an entire fucking career out of fucking over an innocent man.
Title IX is ostensibly a good thing. The "Dear Colleague" letter that threatened the funding for colleges that didn't use it to fuck over their male students is horrific and causing massive damage to men and their lives.
I don't want women to be assaulted. I don't think Title IX protects women at all and protecting women is not an excuse to destroy the education and prospects of men.
Nazi sympathizers want to be Nazis.
Thing is, I haven't seen anybody in this entire fucking discussion sympathise with the Nazis.
You're throwing random accusations around and using those to justify violence against the people you're accusing. That doesn't make them a nazi, that makes you a cunt.
Remind me, when was anal sex
A - Required to be performed by anybody by law
B - Required for a gay relationship
C - Required for someone to be gay whether in a relationship or not
Finding anal sex icky is not and never was a justification for persecuting homosexuals, so why would you suggest it's a reason in Uganda?
Fuck me it's like arguing with a child. You're failing to comprehend basic concepts and projecting your own interpretations onto me.
As a basic example, you keep telling me what May says and that I believe it. I don't give a fuck what May says and I don't agree with much of her approach or policy. Your entire base is a swamp of misunderstanding, false assumption and crackpot analysis.
I can't be arsed trying to educate you, you don't want to listen and you lack the basic intelligence to comprehend.
So to close this off: a referendum on the proposed deal would be fucking insane because it would prevent us negotiating a good deal. Just fucking accept it or find an adult with the patience to teach you.
So effectively you're saying that you dislike the idea of more democracy, because you don't have faith in Theresa May's ability to act as an effective negotiator
No I am not. It doesn't matter how good a negotiator you are, if the other side knows that they get everything they want (including humiliating you) by not negotiating then it's not a negotiation anyway.
That has fuck all to do with democracy. Telling the EU "avoid agreeing a deal and we will have a referendum on whether to accept your imposed terms" gives them carte blanche to impose whatever the fuck they want.
That is why it's not a democratic approach. It's denying the British public a chance of a deal that's good for Britain and removes the option of just walking away and accepting wto terms.
Shit, 85% of the general election votes went to parties promising a robust negotiation and no second referendum, is that democratic enough for you?
I'd guess not, apparently democracy means you getting what you want and fuck the rest of us.
Their stance is that people be allowed a second referendum once the terms of the deal is clear.
A stance guaranteed to prevent any deal at all, as the EU would immediately refuse anything that might be acceptable as a deal.
They will try anyway, which is why the ability to leave without a deal is essential; without that the UK has no negotiating position.
implies that you know deep down there's a real chance people could reject Brexit if given a second chance to decide the issue
Allow me to clarify: I think a second referendum on leaving the EU would be a bigger vote out now than the one last year.
I think a referendum on the terms of a deal with the EU is a blatant and unsubtle attempt to prevent us leaving at all, and disrespectful to the views of both remain and leave voters.
that's being an anti-democratic authoritarian shit head
I think you'll find that she just got humiliated in a general election.
Hmm. I think it's possible to articulate a Brexit policy that respects the views and desires of everybody.
It might not make them happy but it can at least acknowledge the legitimacy of their views, the validity of their concerns and the challenges of finding optimal outcomes for everybody.
The Conservatives are strictly committed to the union though, so couldn't countenance allowing Scotland to commit economic suicide like that.
The SNP had better get nowhere near being in the UK government anyway. They act like spiteful racist little shits and I'm glad they lost half their seats.
It may be an informal coalition; DUP agree to vote with the Conservatives on key legislation but don't help form the government.
I think that'd be excellent. I think a Conservative government was necessary for a clean Brexit, but a weak one that can't push through its obnoxious authoritarian puritan policies is bloody excellent news.
Nobody fucking wants her. Not even the Tories.
Which is why she can go as control freak as she wants, she wont be able to dictate to anybody.
The party whips are going to have a very very busy few years.
As a friend commented overnight, she looks like a Sith Lord.
Acts like one too...
I think it's because Timmy Fallon is a whinging child and not a credible leader.
The lack of trust following their brief stint in government will be a factor but in the past two years they've been terrible at demonstrating any ability to work towards improving the country.
Their stance on Brexit utterly fails to respect the British people, their communication of policies has managed to pass me completely by and their position on any national issue is "those evil Tories/racists/nasty people want to take away our toys".
I tend not to compliment anybody's shoes, but when I do it's not based on their gender.
I've complimented men and women on their shoes. So far they've all thanked me and exhibited happiness at my comments.
That doesn't change the HR fucking guidance.
No, but expect to see far more online conversations along these lines:
https://www.vice.com/en_uk/art...
Yes, that article genuinely positions the gender disparity in higher education as unfairly impacting on women because they can't all date equally educated men.
I'd use ASCII art to show my empathy levels here but couldn't think of a good representation of 0K.
WHITE MEN. Not Africans. Not Indians. Not Chinese. White men.
What, like all those Persians? The Egyptians? The people that built complex civilisations in China, South American and Central America?
You're a racist twat.
Your anecdote isn't terribly helpful. I've had divisive competitive fuckwit female project managers, and excellent intelligent compassionate ones.
Much the same as the male ones really.
If you can't program, you're not a software engineer.
That's ok, you can be a business analyst, a project manager, a tester, an artist, a designer.
But you want to be a software engineer? Write quality code. Sure, do a ton of shit alongside that, including scary amounts of communication, but if you can't code, get another fucking job.
I'm not surrounded by men and I've been hit upon by men. I've had women make unwanted propositions to me too.
I've also made approaches to women that have resulted in rejection, so I've caused them to incur unwanted propositions.
What, you want everybody to stop trying to fuck each other? I mean, I support the end of humanity that this would cause, but I think I'm in a minority here.
We all know exactly what he actually said. You're the one claiming he had a subtext.
Others have highlighted a number of possible interpretations for the reported perceptions. So far you're the only person to posit that the women are lying.
Think on that for a bit.