Gotta love the FCC.. . HEW} WOULD Y' d) U LIKE ‘THIS tait ' ilgili j c' Gotta love the FCC HEW} WOULD Y' d) U LIKE ‘THIS tait ' ilgili j c'
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (168)
[ 168 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
#4 - warlockrichard
Reply +276 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
User avatar #28 to #4 - communistnazi
Reply -6 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
#52 to #28 - swagbot
Reply +16 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Heh... 'protected'.


People need to see these images - to understand what's going on in their world... and what their Tax Money is being spent on.
#56 to #28 - ffinfinity
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
The media should stop protecting people from the truth of the world. These things ARE happening in the world and pretending they aren't isn't doing anyone any good it creates a false world around those watching. It is a shame in this time when information can be so easily acquired people squander it or avoid the truth.

These images should be more mainstream because they depict the harsh reality that is war and why we should act to prevent more of it.
User avatar #90 to #28 - funnybox
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
"Censorship existed to protect you from these"
If Americans or any nation didn't hide what war and death really looked like from their citizens politicians wouldn't be able to use it to keep their citizens/voters so obedient and happy to die and spend money on something outta fear to keep the "bad" people away
User avatar #44 to #28 - huntergriff
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
two of those are...pretty tame actually.
User avatar #134 to #4 - avatarsarefornoobs
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
bear in mind this comes from a guy who never saw the television or the internet...
User avatar #26 to #4 - puffbrownies
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
is this really a quote from him
User avatar #29 to #26 - arandomanon
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
Of course, don't you see the quote is with his picture?
User avatar #27 to #26 - xxhadesflamesxx
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
yes
User avatar #15 to #4 - atrocitustheking
Reply +21 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
Oh Mark Twain, you're such a gold mine of quotes.
#73 to #15 - qazlord
Reply +18 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
User avatar #87 to #73 - iviagic
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
"gg"
-Mark Twain"
-Adam"
-iviagic
User avatar #88 to #73 - qazlord
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
the funniest part about this dude that i forgot to mention was that he is the first in the senior picture section in my year book
User avatar #84 to #73 - popnotes
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Aman for prez
User avatar #7 - tittylovin
Reply +128 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
Whenever a freedom is taken away, it's always "for the kids."
Don't let soccermoms rule the world.
User avatar #31 to #7 - soccermoms
Reply +41 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
Hey **** you man
#54 to #31 - alcoholicsemen
Reply +17 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
did you create this account to **** with him?
#61 to #54 - soccermoms
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
mmmmmmmmmmmmmaybe
User avatar #70 to #61 - blesstheinternet
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Dedication to the max.
#32 to #31 - tittylovin
Reply +14 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
Dude, I have the best gif for you.
Dude, I have the best gif for you.
User avatar #51 to #32 - soccermoms
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
*yoink*
#1 - worldofwarcraftdog
Reply +117 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
we got ours wrapped in fear.
#6 to #1 - anon id: cebdf079
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
of terrorism .....
#8 to #1 - anon id: 3726dd7a
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave...

lol
#10 to #1 - anon id: 4523e988
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
One anti-terrorism it is.
#36 to #1 - anon id: 67439358
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Sick and tired of people acting like the NSA is this big bad guy. The NSA is a bunch of children.

You want scary? The US Navy is scary. The **** they do is hardcore, and they do it around the globe.
#107 to #36 - anon id: 60541ab2
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
I have a right to fap to whatever i want without some guy blackmailing me in few years from now!.
#9 - Sworley
Reply -27 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
#118 to #9 - seggbekuki
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
User avatar #143 to #118 - heartlessrobot
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
I don't know about you, but I'd rather be shot than choke on fluids from my own lungs because someone mixed household cleaners and threw them into the building.
#145 to #143 - seggbekuki
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
well, you are a creative person I give you that
well, you are a creative person I give you that
User avatar #146 to #145 - heartlessrobot
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Mix bleach and ammonia, make a lethal gas.
#147 to #146 - seggbekuki
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
ok now mister, take it easy
ok now mister, take it easy
#148 to #147 - heartlessrobot
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Make me.
Make me.
#149 to #148 - seggbekuki
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
ya wanna play rough boy
ya wanna play rough boy
#150 to #149 - heartlessrobot
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Why yes, yes I do.
#151 to #150 - seggbekuki
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
then bend over lad, i'll get your ass handed to ya with a surprise sausage in it
then bend over lad, i'll get your ass handed to ya with a surprise sausage in it
#152 to #151 - heartlessrobot
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Hooray for buttsex!
#153 to #152 - seggbekuki
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
***** I aint sexin' yo ass, I'll just shove unidentified object up in it    
 and maybe sex it later
***** I aint sexin' yo ass, I'll just shove unidentified object up in it
and maybe sex it later
User avatar #154 to #153 - heartlessrobot
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Sounds like a good time to me.
#155 to #154 - seggbekuki
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
you weird ass muricans and your weird ass murican things
User avatar #89 to #9 - PVTDickStryker
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
>Implying the 2nd Amendment wasn't made so that citizen's militaristic leverage would mirror the government's.
User avatar #94 to #89 - harshy
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
>implying he is implying
User avatar #96 to #9 - clavatninenine
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
The Right to Bear Arms was originally meant to be "The people have the right to form militias and defend themselves in the event the military is no longer able to protect them."

The whole "You have the right to own assault rifles" is a much more recent interpretation of the 2nd amendment right.

People also need to remember that the bill of rights was written centuries ago and was meant to reflect the needs and desires of the people back then. The bill of rights is in desperate need of being updated, but unfortunately doing so would only result in more people being pissed off while everybody else thinks it's amazing.

You can't win when trying to bring up the bill of rights. It's too old and to open to interpretation.
#138 to #96 - anon id: 6ce6bc95
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
You think that people that just fought a war of succession didn't want or feel the need to own weapons that were at least as good as the military's?
User avatar #144 to #138 - clavatninenine
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
again.

back then the weapons were flintlock rifles that took a full minute to reload.

the second amendment was written with that in mind, not ak-47's that could kill 20 people in a few seconds.
User avatar #72 to #9 - gibroner
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
listen up and let me try to educate you on why thats a ******* stupid argument:

>first off nowhere in the second amendment does it specify the type of armaments that people should be allowed to keep it doesn't even say guns it says "arms" as in any type of ******* weapon

>second lets say for argument's sake that they were referring to muskets well muskets were the standard issue armament of every modern military of the time so that would translate to assault rifles today

>third to say that the 2nd amendment shouldn't apply to modern firearms is like saying that freedom of the press shouldn't apply to radio or television because they weren't around at the time
User avatar #81 to #72 - Sworley
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
to be honest, i didnt really think much of the comic it had a founding father floating and i like the word bodacious. im definitely not against right to bear arms, and to be honest dont really know too much about guns to defend either side.
#103 to #81 - meierme
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
its a very hot topic now days. so much so that i intentionally spent an entire quarter in college writing a research paper about the fallacy of gun violence, just so i had the knowledge to defend my argument.
User avatar #50 to #9 - majordraco
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
If you are going to use that argument, you would have to say the second amendment was written for the same weapons the military had.

So comparatively it would be to keep civilians on par with the current military.
User avatar #82 to #50 - Sworley
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
geez, i just wanted to post a picture of a flying founding father saying bodacious, im not anti gun
#71 to #50 - gibroner
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #11 to #9 - heartlessrobot
Reply +75 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
Nowhere in the amendment does it specify what weapons are allowed and which ones aren't.
User avatar #12 to #11 - invshika
Reply +18 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
technically, if one could afford it, an individual could, under the second amendment, own an atomic bomb
User avatar #13 to #12 - heartlessrobot
Reply +12 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
I don't see why not.
#17 to #13 - anon id: 6f37f1ff
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
So if somebody walked around your town with a 1 Kiloton Mk-54 SADM Special Atomic Demolition Munition "backpack nuke" you would be completely ok with it?

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a portable nuke is a good guy with a portable nuke!
User avatar #21 to #17 - IAmManbearpig
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
Doesn't matter if people are okay with it if it's their right and within the law. That's basically saying "not everyone is okay with gay marriage, therefore they should not have the right."
User avatar #132 to #21 - brettyoke
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Gay marriage won't blow up my home town.
#113 to #21 - shadowgandalf
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
I'm just going out on a limp here, but i think that the moment that CIA or FBI gets a notice abbout a civilian assembling/buying a nuke, he/she will get a 1-way ticket to Guantanamo
User avatar #119 to #113 - IAmManbearpig
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
yeah, but like... you have a nuke.
#40 to #21 - noschool
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
correction, gay marriage isn't a right, that's why the government in some states has the ability to make laws against it. if a majority in a community isn't okay with it they can outlaw it, however they can't outlaw the ownership of guns.
User avatar #42 to #40 - IAmManbearpig
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
fair point.
"not everyone is okay with religion, therefore people should not have to right to freedom of religion"
User avatar #19 to #17 - heartlessrobot
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
It's for hunting.
User avatar #64 to #19 - forbesydemon
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
I beg to differ. I cannot see how your suitcase nuke with extended mag, foregrip and tactical scope could be used for hunting. It's clearly an assault weapon.
User avatar #68 to #64 - heartlessrobot
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
But it's perfect for squirrels. Almost as fun as napalm shotgun shells.
#86 to #68 - sspacecore
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
User avatar #142 to #86 - heartlessrobot
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
That's hilarious every time I read it.
User avatar #69 to #68 - forbesydemon
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Well, I suppose forest fires isn't too much of a problem if most of the forest is vaporised instantly.
User avatar #41 to #17 - skittlesinexcess
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Yes I would, I live in a black neighbor hood, all the kids have RA-115s these days, and I feel the need to keep up with the trends.
User avatar #18 to #17 - heartlessrobot
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
I'd ask him where I could buy one too.
User avatar #43 to #12 - friedgreenpomatoes
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Actually no. If I recall, the amount of uranium necessary to do that is illegal for citizens to own.
User avatar #45 to #43 - invshika
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
I'm talking only about the second amendment, of course there're laws against owning fully automatic weapons, bombs, chemical weapons, etc.
User avatar #66 to #45 - heartlessrobot
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
What about fully automatic bombs with bayonets and scopes?
User avatar #46 to #45 - friedgreenpomatoes
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
ah
nevermind then
User avatar #47 to #12 - nigeltheoutlaw
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Rights can be restricted to a reasonable degree, even Constitutional ones. For example, you can not shout "fire" in a crowded theater, even if it should be covered under free speech. The same applies to some weapons.
User avatar #53 to #12 - garymotherfingoak
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
1. citation needed
2. even if it was, Im pretty sure the US gov would confiscate it and label you as literally worse than hitler
User avatar #139 to #12 - mermoohue
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
I thought you needed a license for owning nuclear material

Inb4 buzzkillington
User avatar #136 to #11 - jukuku
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
So why are the literalists not arguing for nuclear, chemical and biological weapons?

The amendment is seriously flawed because it never defined what an arm is.
User avatar #120 to #11 - gare
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
You're correct but I do understand what he's saying it's that when they made the Amendment they did not have all of these new guns that we have now in mind, still a pretty dumb reason.
#14 - include
Reply +50 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #97 to #14 - apirateslifeforme
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Am I the only one who watched this and had that original Pixar sound makes playing in their head?
#114 to #97 - broswagonist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
User avatar #156 to #114 - apirateslifeforme
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/04/2014) [-]
Seven ******* billion people.

I bet at least a billion haven't heard what I'm talking about and I was actually wondering if it occurred to anyone else.
#157 to #156 - broswagonist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/04/2014) [-]
User avatar #158 to #157 - apirateslifeforme
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/04/2014) [-]
Get over yourself.
User avatar #122 to #114 - quasatranquility
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
It's a figure of speech, dickwad.
User avatar #124 to #122 - broswagonist
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
It's overused and also sucks.
User avatar #125 to #124 - quasatranquility
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Many things are overused, but pointing out a flaw in a figure of speech is just idiotic. There are so many things people says that actually doesn't make sense at all, like "It's a piece of cake". What the **** is that supposed to mean? Figure of speech.
User avatar #126 to #125 - broswagonist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
It's still overused and also still sucks. wouldn't be any different for someone saying it's a piece of cake outside of a movie and younger than my parents
User avatar #127 to #126 - quasatranquility
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Well so is that reaction image you posted.
User avatar #128 to #127 - broswagonist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Not nearly overused enough, or people wouldn't still say it.
#111 to #97 - anon id: 2e3ca807
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
no.
User avatar #24 - wthree
Reply +42 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
I love these political cartoons with no subtlety.

How can we suggest that this character is "the corporate media"?
I know, let's dress him up in a suit, a nice rational haircut and a giant sign saying "THE CORPORATE MEDIA".

They also have a tendency to simplify a complex issue into reactionary nonsense.
User avatar #57 to #24 - popkornking
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Correlating "reactionary" with oversimplification. Dat partisanship.
#3 - hasinvadedyou
Reply +21 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
Fill in the blanks, be creative inb4******
Fill in the blanks, be creative inb4******
#48 to #3 - paranoidweazle
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
"tits" or "ass?"
#133 to #3 - namnori
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Comment Picture
#75 to #3 - deathchain
Reply +13 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
#77 to #75 - grimmwaters
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Damn..
#22 - okamiterasu
Reply +18 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
#58 - freedombirdman
Reply +17 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
I used to enjoy political cartoons, but now I've realized they only serve to further obscure issues by boiling them down to vague, oversimplified strawman arguments. While I acknowledge that political cartoons serve as a useful means of generating interest in complex issues, it troubles me that many people take them far too seriously. Political cartoons should be a fun springboard to begin discussing the issues, not the basis of your argument.

To its credit, this comic does bring up a valid point that politicians have a tendency to manipulate people's fears in order to achieve ulterior motives.This is why we must remain calm and rational even in crisis. Fear is a doorway through which others can manipulate you and cause you to act irrationally.
#63 to #58 - anon id: 1c13df81
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
hurp durp
#117 to #58 - bithcwits
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Well said.
#74 to #58 - romanlettuce
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Good point.
User avatar #102 to #58 - geese
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
the problem is that most people arent smart/interested enough to fully understand complicated political issues. They usually just follow their party or are apathetic because its easier.

And of course the parties are about as complicated as "sex bad, capitalism good" or "equality good, corporations bad"
#98 to #58 - acemcgunner
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
#16 - kopieermachine
Reply +16 123456789123345869
(07/02/2014) [-]
User avatar #110 to #16 - tsoper
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
wtf is bitcoin
User avatar #130 to #110 - eiaisqzbsesb
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Bitcoin is an online currency with actual value which is "mined" using a pretty complex program. Also, with listentobitcoin.com/ it makes pretty soothing ambient sound.
#115 to #110 - anon id: 5a5fdf42
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(07/03/2014) [-]
Like coins but on the internet