|
Patience posted:The thing I find scariest is that these fantasies always assume a universal hatred of conservativism- which in turn justifies their response. You know that whole "demonization of the Other to legitimize what I am going to later do to them"? This is that in reverse. It's being persecuted for your beliefs, and as a martyr getting to enact violence in the name of a glorious cause and survival. Conservatives are oppressed anytime they are not allowed to oppress everyone else like in the good old days. VVVVV When Occupy Wall-Street sits in a place and gets tear-gassed, they are violent anti-American rape-happy thugs. When conservatives fantasize about overthrowing the government and assassinating elected officials slobbering over a Putin-like authoritarian to come and beat the gays they are Jeffersonian idealists refreshing the tree of liberty. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Dec 4, 2013 |
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 12:33 |
|
|
hirvox posted:There isn't any, it's just speculation. Supposedly the military is running war games where the scenario is massive civil unrest on home soil. So the author speculates that Obama is creating that massive unrest by having Obamacare and EBT fail on purpose. And after that's it's the slippery slope to tyranny. And the military "purges" he's complaining about are to get rid of anyone who wouldn't want to follow this plan. The Rokstar posted:Yeah, and in fact I think the studies that I vaguely remember said something to the effect of the reason why low speed limits are more dangerous isn't because of just the speeds, but because it causes greater disparities in how fast people are going because of some people going 80 and other people going 50 or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
The Rokstar posted:Yeah, and in fact I think the studies that I vaguely remember said something to the effect of the reason why low speed limits are more dangerous isn't because of just the speeds, but because it causes greater disparities in how fast people are going because of some people going 80 and other people going 50 or whatever. Yeah, there are people who disobey speed limits because they think they are good drivers and then they cause accidents. Many drivers are very entitled so it's always someone else's fault for daring to use the road when I need to get somewhere in a hurry!
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:31
|
|
|
The Rokstar posted:Yeah, and in fact I think the studies that I vaguely remember said something to the effect of the reason why low speed limits are more dangerous isn't because of just the speeds, but because it causes greater disparities in how fast people are going because of some people going 80 and other people going 50 or whatever. Another component (And I may be wrong because I'm trying to recall details from an undergraduate psychology class) is lack of attention. I remember reading a comparison with the autobahn which examined the level of attention drivers were affording the road and traffic around them. Drivers at slower speeds were more prone to distractions and the effects of boredom and lethargy impairing driving, whereas the speeds on the autobahn demanded the driver's full attention. But hey, there's a whole bunch of controversial studies surrounding optimal road safety; did you know marijuana only impairs the driving and cognitive abilities of non-habitual smokers, whereas chronic and heavy smokers performed as well as control populations? Funny stuff. Edit: That lovely bit above is an example from an undergraduate research design course so that's why I didn't immediately cite it as I'd have to dig. Apologies to individuals who take issue with the claim. PoizenJam fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Dec 4, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:31
|
|
|
quote:whereas chronic and heavy smokers performed as well as control populations? Because they're so paranoid that they pay super attention to every little detail of their driving to keep it perfect. "30mph road? Better turn on the cruise control around 27. Just in case."
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
Poizen Jam posted:If I remember correctly this crazy libertarian traffic laws crap came up earlier in the thread, with some libertarian bitching that speeding and reckless driving were victimless crimes if no one was hit, and therefor shouldn't be crimes at all. It was phrased as the government scamming the populace by fining for non crimes. So if I play Russian Roulette with him without his knowledge there's no crime as long as I never actually shoot him. Risk is a cost. There's an entire industry, a group of industries, built around that fact. Why do people who exalt capitalism know so little about it? Re: the specific example in that post: Anyone know of any news stories about accidents where occupants were ejected from a car and injured or killed bystanders? This is the closest a quick search got me. http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=26954581
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:Why do people who exalt capitalism know so little about it? The second part of your question answers the first part.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:Re: the specific example in that post: Anyone know of any news stories about accidents where occupants were ejected from a car and injured or killed bystanders? I don't know of any specific examples like that, but there's plenty of examples of them killing fellow occupants as they're tossed around like a ragdoll so I'm not sure it even matters. But yes, becoming a human cannonball in a populated area probably isn't safe for bystanders.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:52
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Yeah but Our Boys who, like me, dream only patriotic dreams like assassinating the President, are led by officers. And you know what a requirement to a get a commission is, right? That's right: a bachelor's degree from the liberal university system http://www.oru.edu/academics/resources/rotc/afrotc.php http://www.liberty.edu/studentaffairs/armyrotc/index.cfm?PID=23462
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
Radish posted:People make the same argument for drunk driving. Hey, it's like white people (an-cap is really a hell white community) whine about the one portion of the law they normally run afoul of.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:56
|
|
|
I've gotten the "but no one got hurt" argument before...FROM 7 YEAR OLD CHILDREN.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 17:57
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:http://www.oru.edu/academics/resources/rotc/afrotc.php Sure but those officers are obviously the ones Obama would get rid of in favor of the ones who graduated from the elitist liberal universities. He's already oppressing those universities by not letting withhold birth control from awful sluts. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
Radish posted:I briefly knew a girl who wouldn't wear one and apparently broke up with a boyfriend partly over the fact that he wouldn't stop harping on her to put it on (the car also wouldn't shut up about it which got irritating). I also had a co-worker who never wore one either. Some people REALLY don't like wearing seat belts for reasons I don't quite understand. I've probably told this story in this thread a long time ago, but it bears repeating to understand the mindset of these people. Once while with my ex, we invited her brother over for dinner. He was upset because he had to go to court to argue a ticket. I asked if it was speeding, he said "no, I wasn't wearing my seat belt." And I was a little shocked, so I asked why he wouldn't wear it and his response was "Because the government shouldn't tell me what to do. I tried telling this to the cop but he just laughed at me and wrote me a ticket!" Because he expected that argument to work. He then said he was excited to tell the judge the exact same argument and get his ticket revoked. I told him to be apologetic and say it will never happen again, and that would probably be a better argument than that argument, and he listened to me at least 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 18:25
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:I've gotten the "but no one got hurt" argument before...FROM 7 YEAR OLD CHILDREN. From the mouth of babes...
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 18:27
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:I've probably told this story in this thread a long time ago, but it bears repeating to understand the mindset of these people. Once while with my ex, we invited her brother over for dinner. He was upset because he had to go to court to argue a ticket. I asked if it was speeding, he said "no, I wasn't wearing my seat belt." And I was a little shocked, so I asked why he wouldn't wear it and his response was "Because the government shouldn't tell me what to do. I tried telling this to the cop but he just laughed at me and wrote me a ticket!" Because he expected that argument to work. I went on an island hopping boat tour earlier this month, and there was an American couple in our tour group. As soon as we pass out of sight of the coast, the guy takes off his life jacket over the protestations of the native tour guide, saying "I can swim, I don't need that". It didn't really register with me at first, only later when he was talking about how he'd ridden his bike all the way down the California coast before while, you guessed it, not wearing a helmet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 18:34
|
|
|
Ferroque posted:
Come to think of it, the obvious remedy here is to beat the statists at their own game by wearing your seatbelt all the time, thus defeating their wily plan to reduce you to serfdom! Another successful tactic is, if you screw up and forget like they count on, to pay your fines promptly instead of killing cops. Take away their excuse to imprison you, that'll show 'em!
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 18:35
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Come to think of it, the obvious remedy here is to beat the statists at their own game by wearing your seatbelt all the time, thus defeating their wily plan to reduce you to serfdom! Nonono, you tell them that you won't create joinder with them and then tell the court that the gold fringe on the flag means its an admirality court. Trust me on this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 18:40
|
|
|
[quote post="422720596"] What will the Army do if called in to fight armed civilians in the streets of the United States? How will that urban warfare be conducted? Will troops be able to fire upon other American citizens when the troops take an oath to protect American citizens? [/quote] Joke's on them, the oath is to protect the constitution and follow the orders of the president and officers. Protecting American citizens isn't part of it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
Here's a well sourced report about why free medical treatment for life for military retirees is a myth. To sum it up, the Department of Defense allows retirees to be seen for free at military hospitals on a space available basis. However, this is not an entitlement, and you're not guaranteed service if you don't live near a military treatment facility. http://www.law.umaryland.edu/marshall/crsreports/crsdocuments/98-1006_F.pdf
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 18:56
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:Nonono, you tell them that you won't create joinder with them and then tell the court that the gold fringe on the flag means its an admirality court. Trust me on this. Oh right I forgot that without the government the private cops will be like Snowcrash and punctuate every interaction with disclaimers and disclosures to obtain your implied consent for everything, but the wily Free Man who knows the magic words can withold consent! Instead of, you know, the security corp just beating the gently caress out of you. Hmmm now that I am thinking about it... 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 19:03
|
|
|
TerminalSaint posted:Joke's on them, the oath is to protect the constitution and follow the orders of the president and officers. Protecting American citizens isn't part of it. Yeah, when this has actually happened in the past (more frequently than some people realize), the answer to the question 'what will the Army do if ordered to fire on American civilians?' has usually been 'fire on American civilians'. When you send in the military to deal with a protest or riot, historically their tactics have basically boiled down to 'shoot everyone until the remaining protestors go home'. Army Aviation even dropped bombs on black neighborhoods during the 1921 Tulsa race riots. But of course, almost all of those historical incidents involved left-wingers, labor unions, or
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 19:15
|
|
|
All this vehicle chat reminded me to send this video of a 1959 Bel Air crashing into a 2009 Malibu to someone who was telling me how his 1970s Nova was so much more robust than a new car, but looking at the youtube comments I'm not sure if it will convince him, half of the people just straight up declare that it's fake. There really is no convincing some people of anything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 20:34
|
|
|
BitcoinRockefeller posted:All this vehicle chat reminded me to send this video of a 1959 Bel Air crashing into a 2009 Malibu to someone who was telling me how his 1970s Nova was so much more robust than a new car, but looking at the youtube comments I'm not sure if it will convince him, half of the people just straight up declare that it's fake. There really is no convincing some people of anything.  And I got this in reply:  Why is it so hard for people to imagine that in 50 years automotive engineers have actually, you know, gotten better at their jobs and learned from the research that's been conducted and the experiences they've had?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 21:06
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:Reagan was able to advocate being a petty, spiteful dick to poor people in a folksy, friendly way that no one has been able to do quite since. To drag over a fav from the Politoons thread: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 21:12
|
|
|
JohnClark posted:Why is it so hard for people to imagine that in 50 years automotive engineers have actually, you know, gotten better at their jobs and learned from the research that's been conducted and the experiences they've had? The kind of people that ask that question barely remember basic algebra from middle school and know jack poo poo about physics and engineering. They can't even imagine using historical data and research to improve on their own cooking.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 21:20
|
|
|
EightBit posted:The kind of people that ask that question barely remember basic algebra from middle school and know jack poo poo about physics and engineering. They can't even imagine using historical data and research to improve on their own cooking. They also tend to share the same mentality as, if not directly overlap with, the people who believe that animal testing is literally so that a pharma/cosmetic company can figure out how much of a known toxin they can put into a product without killing their customers. Not, y'know, to make sure a product is safe and doesn't cause acne/anaphylaxis/cancer, but because toxic synthetic chemicals are cheaper than real natural ingredients. In the case of "plastic cars", it's the belief that car companies are purposefully reducing the quality of their parts to lower costs, rather than creating safer parts that sacrifice themselves to save the lives of the people inside. Then again, these are the kind of people who buy whatever truck is advertised as having the strongest frame, when in reality the closest they get to going off-road is when they jump a curb, and the most they tow behind them is whatever animal they just ran over.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 21:29
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:Nonono, you tell them that you won't create joinder with them and then tell the court that the gold fringe on the flag means its an admirality court. Trust me on this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 21:30
|
|
|
So as a preface to this, I spent about 8-10 years of my childhood sitting around not doing anything other than watching TV or playing games, because my parents (hard-right, watches Fox News most of the day) thought the public schooling system wasn't good enough for me and at the same time didn't bother committing to a homeschooling program themselves. Naturally, this means I've struggled as an adult to find work when I'm effectively a decade behind when it comes to education. One of my parents emailed a link to a Slate article about how helicopter parenting is the true cause of millennial problems, and how great I turned out when they let me do whatever I wanted.  quote:The big problem is not that they think too highly of themselves. Their bigger challenge is conflict negotiation, and they often are unable to think for themselves. The overinvolvement of helicopter parents prevents children from learning how to grapple with disappointments on their own. If parents are navigating every minor situation for their kids, kids never learn to deal with conflict on their own. Helicopter parenting has caused these kids to crash land. The article itself isn't that bad, though it treats helicopter parenting as the primary cause for millennial strife, when it's just one of the many reasons for the economical issues in my generation. If nothing else, the smug tone from them in the email just annoyed the hell out of me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 22:36
|
|
|
miscellaneous14 posted:So as a preface to this, I spent about 8-10 years of my childhood sitting around not doing anything other than watching TV or playing games, because my parents (hard-right, watches Fox News most of the day) thought the public schooling system wasn't good enough for me and at the same time didn't bother committing to a homeschooling program themselves. Naturally, this means I've struggled as an adult to find work when I'm effectively a decade behind when it comes to education. Sorry for the derail, but uhh...I wanted to let you know that you're not alone. I'm 26 years old, can't do loving poo poo. Don't have a high school diploma. Don't have a GED. Hell, I don't even have a drivers license. I feel like I'm never going to catch up. It doesn't help that I live in bumfuck Georgia and there is pretty much nobody I can ask for help.  Just....You're not alone.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 22:52
|
|
|
Kugyou no Tenshi posted:In the case of "plastic cars", it's the belief that car companies are purposefully reducing the quality of their parts to lower costs, rather than creating safer parts that sacrifice themselves to save the lives of the people inside. I hate that newer cars experience such catastrophic body damage from relatively minor collisions. Then again, my great aunt used a cane and wore leg braces from her early 20s through the end of her life because when she was younger, the Studebaker that she and my great uncle were driving was hit head on, and the engine ended up in her lap. That sort of poo poo doesn't happen nearly so much these days. So as much as I hate the idea of a major repair bill after someone slides into me at 15 mph, I prefer it to the alternative. These people are best ignored.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 22:52
|
|
|
Walter posted:I hate that newer cars experience such catastrophic body damage from relatively minor collisions. Then again, my great aunt used a cane and wore leg braces from her early 20s through the end of her life because when she was younger, the Studebaker that she and my great uncle were driving was hit head on, and the engine ended up in her lap. My dad was like that with cars for awhile, he was always lamenting the small car he's driving compared to his old Impalas or whatevers, as he said those were built like tanks and so on. Then a good friend of his got in a crazy accident in his Honda, and walked away from the accident. They guy in a older 70's style car didn't do as well. He changed his opinion pretty quick on that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2013 23:40
|
|
|
Poizen Jam posted:If I remember correctly this crazy libertarian traffic laws crap came up earlier in the thread, with some libertarian bitching that speeding and reckless driving were victimless crimes if no one was hit, and therefor shouldn't be crimes at all. It was phrased as the government scamming the populace by fining for non crimes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=158odrczKbI Imprisoned for a crime I didn't even commit. Attempted murder - now honestly, what is that?! Do they give a Nobel prize for attempted chemistry?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 00:41
|
|
|
So the Bel-Air offset crash was pretty catastrophic, but even in the past 15 years there's been a boatload of development in car safety. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBDyeWofcLY
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 01:08
|
|
|
Got this one.  Are we sure Ann Coulter isn't a stealth leftist playing a super-long-game to discredit the right? She admits that Republicans will be unable to return to the majority without the support of recent immigrants and decides the best way to deal with that is to insult the very voting bloc they need to have any chance of winning?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 01:30
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Got this one. Ann Coulter is just another empty headed propaganda tool like Michelle Bachman, Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin, and others. I mean, I know you know that. But its hilarious how people take her seriously despite the many signs that she should never be taken seriously.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 01:34
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Ann Coulter is just another empty headed propaganda tool like Michelle Bachman, Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin, and others. Sometimes it's hard to tell with Coulter. Wasn't she the one when, referring to Herman Cain, actually said that black Republicans are more black than black Democrats? There's sort of that thought going with a lot of the right-wing talking heads that they just started off pandering to the fringe and started believing their own tripe, but sometimes Coulter hits "how can a functioning brain create that thought" moments.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Got this one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1seThIG34R8
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 01:50
|
|
|
Kugyou no Tenshi posted:Sometimes it's hard to tell with Coulter. Wasn't she the one when, referring to Herman Cain, actually said that black Republicans are more black than black Democrats? Bet you don't know which party voted for the Civil Rights Act.  But seriously, I know I should just ignore her, but I can't help it, there's a train wreck quality. If I see a post about Coulter on Media Matters or wherever, I have to read it. I know she's a troll and I'm giving her what she wants, but I just can't help it. (I really hate it when supposed liberals insult her with transphobic taunts, though.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 01:58
|
|
|
Anyone who immigrated in the past (3+) decades isn't a real American and should have their right to vote challenged at every opportunity - Ann Coulter
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 02:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 12:33 |
|
|
Jurgan posted:But seriously, I know I should just ignore her, but I can't help it, there's a train wreck quality. If I see a post about Coulter on Media Matters or wherever, I have to read it. I know she's a troll and I'm giving her what she wants, but I just can't help it. (I really hate it when supposed liberals insult her with transphobic taunts, though.) That poo poo bothers me too, like the gay jokes about Michelle Bachmann's husband or Rick Perry. "I don't always support LGBT rights, but when I do I prefer to make that clear by using gay and transsexual as insults!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2013 02:28
|
|