Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search
hide menu

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Show:   Highest Rated Top Rated Newest
auto-refresh every 1 2 3 5 seconds


Per page:
Order:
Latest users (5): feelythefeel, liberalgodess, princessren, scaredog, tredbear, anonymous(19).
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #65089 - ogcj (07/01/2014) [-]
why we need a permanent smoking ban
www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTbsnCdITeQ
User avatar #65108 to #65089 - alimais (07/01/2014) [-]
undeadwill, pebar

You don't have anything about smoking because it's the of a person to do everything with their body as they want.

But what about if people around smokers that have a problem with it ?
I don't want to ban it but I get major headaches and burning eyes when people smoke around me.
User avatar #65111 to #65108 - pebar (07/01/2014) [-]
Smoking Bans: Banning Freedom here's a viedo
User avatar #65110 to #65108 - pebar (07/01/2014) [-]
You have the right to smoke in your own house. You do not have the right to smoke in somebody else's house unless they say you can because it's their air. Likewise bars should not be forced to ban smoking because it's their bar. If you don't want to be around smokers, then don't. Nobody is forcing you to stay near a smoker. In today's society where smoking is seen as a health hazard, most companies have an economic incentive to ban it because they would lose customers, just like you said.

But when the government steps in and tells people what they can and cannot do with their own stuff, that crosses a line.

I don't have a problem with smoking being banned by the government in public places meaning publicly owned, not private places like stores where people tend to gather
User avatar #65109 to #65108 - alimais (07/01/2014) [-]
*.... the right of .....
User avatar #65101 to #65089 - undeadwill (07/01/2014) [-]
We don't need a smoking ban and any attempt to do so would be a means of social control and used to violate civil rights along with destroy industry and American history
#65104 to #65101 - byposted (07/01/2014) [-]
Science is on his side undeadwill, not yours. And it does not stop at nicotine; smoking has absolutely no benefits, and everybody from raspy-voiced old women to libertarian stoner degenerates need to be hanged, and will be, God willing, on the Day of the Rope.    
   
We can't just regress after progress as a society by having an about-face on weed so soon after cigarettes were made obsolete by way of public bans . It all needs to go.    
   
www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPhdHgqeA6U
Science is on his side undeadwill, not yours. And it does not stop at nicotine; smoking has absolutely no benefits, and everybody from raspy-voiced old women to libertarian stoner degenerates need to be hanged, and will be, God willing, on the Day of the Rope.

We can't just regress after progress as a society by having an about-face on weed so soon after cigarettes were made obsolete by way of public bans . It all needs to go.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPhdHgqeA6U
User avatar #65114 to #65104 - undeadwill (07/01/2014) [-]
Progressives....
#65106 to #65104 - youregaylol (07/01/2014) [-]
I can understand the need to regulate and ban mind altering substances like alcohol and weed, and I acknowledge the addictive properties of nicotine, but the modern stresses of society require some form of relief. Besides, being a smoker is hardly a death sentence. Studies on the subject consistently lump "smokers" with people who smoke a disgusting amount per day. Of course if you smoke a pack a day you're going to have a drastic increase in risk, but a half a pack a week or less? No, your chances of getting cancer are only slightly above non smokers. Of course smoking is unhealthy, but I feel that the stress relief is worth that risk.

If it's done moderately away from the public I see no harm in it.
User avatar #65139 to #65106 - byposted (07/01/2014) [-]
I agree with you. Spurdo signified the sarcasm.
#65093 to #65089 - youregaylol (07/01/2014) [-]
The audio was terrible and I don't feel like being lectured by a kid who looks like he's 14.

I smoke one or two cigars every week in my backyard. I'm not hurting anyone except myself, and even then I'm not hurting myself more than someone who consumes fast food and soda regularly.

I'm well within my rights. A society is nothing without some leisure.
#65103 to #65093 - byposted (07/01/2014) [-]
>Disrespecting based OG CJ   
   
www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNaabtajUlA
>Disrespecting based OG CJ

www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNaabtajUlA
0
#65100 to #65093 - byposted has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #65051 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
Today we learned that an emperor was a dictator and that he was a tyrant.
User avatar #65081 to #65051 - beatmasterz (06/30/2014) [-]
east, whatever, all the same.
User avatar #65082 to #65081 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
Balkans.
If my time comes I shall live it.
User avatar #65083 to #65082 - beatmasterz (06/30/2014) [-]
sure you will buddy
User avatar #65084 to #65083 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
Thanks for the support mate.
User avatar #65061 to #65051 - akkere (06/30/2014) [-]
Emperors tend to have absolute power over their country, so I suppose most of them would be considered dictators. Did they teach you the word "dictator" as a derogatory term or a term of neutral classification?
User avatar #65062 to #65061 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
The word monarch would be more fitting. It's like calling richard the lionheart a marshall.
User avatar #65058 to #65051 - teoragnar (06/30/2014) [-]
What emperor?
User avatar #65059 to #65058 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
Nicholas II of Russia was an evil dictator. Did you know that?
#65056 to #65051 - anonymous (06/30/2014) [-]
TODAY, WE LEARNED THAT BEN WAS FAT AND HE MADE POOP
User avatar #65053 to #65051 - jewishcommunazi (06/30/2014) [-]
Doesn't everyone know that?
User avatar #65055 to #65053 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
Ok, be an emperor is a dictator.
Get it?
User avatar #65060 to #65055 - beatmasterz (06/30/2014) [-]
They usually are.
User avatar #65063 to #65060 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
Depends on who you are talking about but isn't it more fitting to call an emperor a monarch instead of calling him a dictators. It's more royal.
User avatar #65064 to #65063 - beatmasterz (06/30/2014) [-]
A dictator is someone with absolute power, nothing more. Emperors hold absolute power, therefore.....
User avatar #65065 to #65064 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
Royalty.
User avatar #65067 to #65066 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
Royalty.
User avatar #65068 to #65067 - beatmasterz (06/30/2014) [-]
Saying it twice doesn't make it more true
User avatar #65069 to #65068 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
It's more royal to call an emperor a monarch instead of calling him a dictator.
#65071 to #65070 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
You have been enriched.
You have been enriched.
User avatar #65072 to #65071 - beatmasterz (06/30/2014) [-]
But who cares that it's more royal to call an emperor a dictator. First off all it's an opinion, second of all that doesn't change anything, third I will never meet and emperor so why would I care.
#65094 to #65072 - youregaylol (07/01/2014) [-]
I think the only emperor left in the world is the Japanese emperor, so unless you become a convincing geisha ya, you probably wont ever meet an emperor.
User avatar #65074 to #65072 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
Nigger, I have royal blood in me so you are talking to one.
User avatar #65075 to #65074 - beatmasterz (06/30/2014) [-]
Does that make you an emperor? Are you in any position of power right now?
User avatar #65076 to #65075 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
Not yet.
User avatar #65077 to #65076 - beatmasterz (06/30/2014) [-]
Exactly. Royal blood doesn't mean shit. Hierarchies that are not based on dominance are arbitrary and useless.
User avatar #65078 to #65077 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
To you, but time will tell.
User avatar #65079 to #65078 - beatmasterz (06/30/2014) [-]
You live in central europe right? No surprise that you're so oblivious about ruling a country.
User avatar #65080 to #65079 - schnizel (06/30/2014) [-]
I don't think Bosnia is in central Europe.
User avatar #65073 to #65072 - beatmasterz (06/30/2014) [-]
*not to
User avatar #65099 to #65049 - byposted (07/01/2014) [-]
As claim unverifiable "twitter messages?"
User avatar #65090 to #65049 - aceofshadows (07/01/2014) [-]
Why can't ISIS just split up into different groups because of their beliefs and then start killing each other?
User avatar #65050 to #65049 - PopcornViking (06/30/2014) [-]
If ISIS were to draw Israel into the regional conflict it would make the region’s strange politics even stranger. In Iraq and Syria, Israel’s arch nemesis, Iran, is fighting ISIS. Israel, on the other hand, has used its air force from time to time to bomb Hezbollah positions in Syria and Lebanon, the Lebanese militia aligned with Iran. If Israel were to fight against ISIS in Jordan, it would become a de facto ally of Iran, a regime dedicated to its destruction.

But Jordan is also an important ally for Israel. It is one of two countries (along with Egypt) to have a peace treaty with the Jewish state. Jordanian security forces help patrol the east bank of the Jordan River that borders Israel and both countries share intelligence about terrorist groups in the region.
#65098 to #65050 - byposted (07/01/2014) [-]
>If Israel were to fight against ISIS in Jordan, it would become a de facto ally of Iran, a regime dedicated to its destruction.   
   
This is some great geopolitical analysis.  sarcasm  What kind of a doofus wrote this?
>If Israel were to fight against ISIS in Jordan, it would become a de facto ally of Iran, a regime dedicated to its destruction.

This is some great geopolitical analysis. sarcasm What kind of a doofus wrote this?
User avatar #65045 - robinwilliamson (06/30/2014) [-]
What on earth do people still give automatic applause to people who were in the military in Iraq for? Why do they continue to get away with the pretentious WWII mindset that they're the good guys who were protecting us? And why does the fucking military still feed our children propaganda that we're fighting good fights so join on in? What the hell is going on?
#65095 to #65045 - youregaylol (07/01/2014) [-]
It depends on your definition of protecting. If your definition is enemy troops burning your home down then I would argue that the WW2 troops weren't protecting you either, especially the ones on the european front. If you think about it the US could've simply made peace with japan and all immediate threats would have been taken care of.

But when you think about protecting the countries "interests" the WW2 soldiers could be labeled as "protectors" from a certain point of view. Likewise those who fought in Iraq could be thought of as protectors considering they fought for their nations (declared) interest. Besides, the military builds character in a society that is low on character. It provides opportunity for those seeking to benefit their nation. It mobilizes the people disenfranchised by the government. It opens up pathways to valuable experience that the young currently lack. You're getting pissy at people like me who have actually benefited society. Really dumb and extremely dangerous if you ask me. Veterans are 3 times more likely to find a job than civilians. We're proactive and we vote. We know how to organize and we know how and when to act. I'm a contributing member to 7 different veterans groups, 3 of them local. You don't want to upset us.

The military should always be respected if you want a nation to survive. And if you're worried about propaganda don't look at the fucking military, look at the media for fucks sake. The government bureaucracy, the corporations, the bought "news stations", they're the real problem. Look inside the barn instead of throwing tomatoes at the door.
User avatar #65217 to #65095 - robinwilliamson (07/05/2014) [-]
It's the ignorance of the people joining the army that gets me, and the people that have no idea what we do with the military. First, if I was going to serve, I'd want to know what I was putting my life on the line for. I'd damn sure like to know that I was going into an illegal war, or being the invader and not the protector, or going into fights that will just spawn more hate and more people to fight back, or that I was going into the wrong country. And the military boards do own media portions, and they just keep advertising the military as if joining will put you up against bad guys who are a threat to our home country.
There is a shit ton of military industrial complex power in all the things you listed, and I'm not saying that your wife's cousin that served in the Coast Guard is the guy who said he's absolutely certain there's WMD's in Iraq and that we definitely need to buy time slots on CNN and MSNBC to tell people we need to go there, but it's still military whether you're talkin guys who are tied into the money making part of military or the guys talking to the important press people or the guys who sign up having no idea why.
0
#65044 - alimais has deleted their comment [-]
0
#65043 - dubslao has deleted their comment [-]
0
#65039 - ribocoon has deleted their comment [-]
#65031 - anonymous (06/29/2014) [-]
www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/06/27/az-residents-at-chemtrail-hearing-were-being-sprayed-like-were-bugs-and-its-really-not-okay/

Arizona holds hearings over chemtrails.
Basically a bunch of scared old people screaming "google it!"
User avatar #65042 to #65031 - dubslao (06/30/2014) [-]
chemtrails are real
i read it on a facebook page that uses its own website as sources
User avatar #65038 to #65026 - byposted (06/30/2014) [-]
>MRAs
>anti-feminist

I used to believe, after becoming acquainted with MRA literature, that the disconnect between the sexes could be solved in a liberal manner - through the same sort of "mutual understanding" as touted in that content - before I widened my view and saw that the problem was a derivation of egalitarianism.

It is clear that reciprocating the destruction of femininity is not the answer. OP is a tranny wuss who should grow a pair.
User avatar #65047 to #65038 - Shiny ONLINE (06/30/2014) [-]
Modern gender politics are so deeply embroiled in personal agendas that they no longer even have any particular idealistic leanings on the surface. The fact that the term "MRA" was coined when "masculist" already exists (and doesn't sound completely goddamn stupid) is an indicator of this; intentionally vague but catchy-sounding words that change definition on a whim.

I liked it better when kids at least pretended to understand things that actually mattered.
User avatar #65037 to #65026 - ablueguy (06/29/2014) [-]
Yes.
#65034 to #65026 - anonymous (06/29/2014) [-]
I think boys should be bullied for being weak/womanly
User avatar #65033 to #65026 - schnizel (06/29/2014) [-]
Yep.
User avatar #65027 to #65026 - pebar (06/29/2014) [-]
hardly
#65020 - youregaylol (06/29/2014) [-]
Despite my admiration of national socialism, and my belief that it would provide countless benefits to the world, I feel that in todays political climate it will never be applicable in its purest form. The world is to far gone and to susceptible to the powers that be.

I have always thought of national socialism as a sort of solution to societies problems, as opposed to a fervent belief system. If we can solve the problem of social decay, and combat the forces of marxism and corporate manipulation in a way that's possible in the current world, why wouldn't we pursue it.

I would imagine a system that while similar to the fascism that we know of, incorporates elements from the Roman Empire. Of course some things would remain the same. A strong executive body headed by a single powerful figure who embodies the state to it's greatest degree, a firm control of immigration and a suppression of destructive ideas, thats all a given.

But add into the equation a state guard that has one single purpose, to protect the ideology of the state, which will be manifested in an unalterable document that clearly outlines the beliefs of the state. This "constitutional" guard will also serve as the nations military. After all, it must be made clear that war is a manifestation of the beliefs of the people. The citizenry, if being of sound judgement and in accordance with the beliefs of the state, should police themselves through an armed peoples militia, with its members chosen by the community. This eliminates the threat of corporate police. To prevent corruption the people must be able to vote out those officials appointed by the head executive if they believe he is unfit.

The executive cannot be removed from power, but can be made powerless by the people if they continue to vote out his appointees. The citizenry should not be allowed to elect government officials, as this would make the state susceptible to profiteers and power mongers. In this way, merit decides the day.
#65022 to #65020 - anonymous (06/29/2014) [-]
Ha.
Ha.
#65023 to #65022 - youregaylol (06/29/2014) [-]
Hi valeriya
User avatar #65009 - jewishcommunazi (06/28/2014) [-]
Do you guys have a favourite political party? Tell also why, if you feel like it.
User avatar #65048 to #65009 - Shiny ONLINE (06/30/2014) [-]
Not really, since they're either the big two, extremist seat-grabbers and regional parties nobody even acknowledges the existence of. I do like Greens that aren't eco-nuts, though.
User avatar #65028 to #65009 - schnizel (06/29/2014) [-]
Foam party
User avatar #65035 to #65028 - jewishcommunazi (06/29/2014) [-]
Doesn't sound very political, but it sounds pretty fun.
#65019 to #65009 - alimais (06/29/2014) [-]
Freedom Party Austria
Freiheitliche Partei Österreich
FPÖ

The party leader always posts interesting stuff on his account on Facebook
User avatar #65017 to #65009 - jadewest (06/29/2014) [-]
www.ldp.org.au/

these guys, they are neat
User avatar #65014 to #65009 - feelythefeel ONLINE (06/29/2014) [-]
I don't know about foreign parties, but the ones we have are pretty shit (Our current administration has a strange fixation on banishing people at random).
#65011 to #65009 - greatphanacttwo (06/28/2014) [-]
I like the Farty Party.
#65007 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
If some is interested, I have a good political movie here.

We watch movies like this in our school
inside job.avi
User avatar #65005 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
This is much better. Thank you Alimais
User avatar #65006 to #65005 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
The problem is that there is low traffic here and there are mostly 2 parties interested in politics which are Libertarian & Nationalists

You see, it takes just one guy to improve this board but also only one guy can degrade it
#65002 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
What's your stance on the Ukraine conflict ?
What's your stance on the Ukraine conflict ?

#65054 to #65002 - anonymous (06/30/2014) [-]
Don't know to be honest.   
   
Russia illigally invaded Crimea, and is funding a bloody insurgency in the east.   
   
But Ukraine is ok with Nazi militias, ethnic cleansing and medival justice.
Don't know to be honest.

Russia illigally invaded Crimea, and is funding a bloody insurgency in the east.

But Ukraine is ok with Nazi militias, ethnic cleansing and medival justice.
#64989 - anonymous (06/28/2014) [-]
Where do Libertarians and the Tea Party differ the most?
User avatar #64990 to #64989 - pebar (06/28/2014) [-]
Social issues.
Libertarians support things like gay marriage and ending the drug war, but the TEA party is more like die hard no-compromise republican. In general, TEA party people focus more on economic issues so it's not that big a deal, mostly because they strongly favor the constitution and states' rights, but if you ask them about social issues like gay marriage, they'll still oppose them.
User avatar #65003 to #64990 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
I like them more than republicans however.
#64977 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
What's your stance on GMO's ?
#64991 to #64977 - pebar (06/28/2014) [-]
Scientists and farmers have been modifying the genes of their crops for hundreds of years. You will not find a commercial crop that is purely natural. If you're specifically talking about the cutting and pasting of genes from one organism to another, I wouldn't worry about it because all the research, even by independent groups, says it's safe.   
   
The potential for mass production (cheap food for everyone) far outweighs the bad, especially when the bad is completely over exaggerated.
Scientists and farmers have been modifying the genes of their crops for hundreds of years. You will not find a commercial crop that is purely natural. If you're specifically talking about the cutting and pasting of genes from one organism to another, I wouldn't worry about it because all the research, even by independent groups, says it's safe.

The potential for mass production (cheap food for everyone) far outweighs the bad, especially when the bad is completely over exaggerated.
User avatar #65125 to #64991 - drastronomy (07/01/2014) [-]
i have a little bit of info here:

making more effective plants and crops=more production of the crop thats modified. This contributes to lower biological diversity due to the nature of gene manipulation - lower biological diversity= more in danger of bacteria, parasites, etc. - this means a type of bacteria could lay waste so extreme amounts of food, whereas unmodified food would still have a large enough biological diversity to lower the damages.
#64992 to #64991 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
There are different methods of genetically modifying food like crossing, mutating, recombination and more.

If they are healthy can be debated for hours so there is that.

The specific part what annoys me is the patent part on those seeds
www.techdirt.com/articles/20121229/03344321523/main-problem-with-patented-gm-food-is-patent-not-fact-that-its-gm.shtml

>pic is genetically modified mice
User avatar #65004 to #64992 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
I think the patent should only cover the manufacturing of the seeds and not the use of them.
#64996 to #64992 - pebar (06/28/2014) [-]
Monopolies suck
Monopolies suck
User avatar #64985 to #64977 - jewishcommunazi (06/28/2014) [-]
They're a little necessary, we just have to make sure we make them less harmful in certain aspects.
User avatar #64988 to #64985 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
If they are healthy or not can be discussed but the system about nature with patent is outright sick. There should be no patent on those GMO seeds
User avatar #64994 to #64988 - akkere (06/28/2014) [-]
It could be argued that GMOs aren't exactly a product of nature, but a design of a laboratory, and therefore should be treated as such and not in any way natural.

That being said, GMOs aren't exactly your usual laboratory invention so there should be a different set of guidelines for patenting the specific product. This mostly being due to the fact that by nature this product may inevitably end up in the crop of an unsuspecting farmer, who may then find himself dragged into a lawsuit from a company like Monsanto.

So technically, speaking, there shouldn't be any patent on the GMO seeds with patents in their current system, but a form of copyright ownership should be placed on them in a manner of any form of unique design should be claimed ownership by its creator.
#64969 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
What's your stance on this ?
For me it's just more fuel into a already big fire

news.yahoo.com/obama-seeks-500-million-congress-help-moderate-syrian-193135415.html
www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-seeks-500-million-to-train-equip-syrian-rebels/

I'm kinda annoyed because some idiot always removes the notion about Al-Qaeda in the opposition column of this wiki article
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_armed_groups_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War
User avatar #65012 to #64969 - byposted (06/28/2014) [-]
Have you considered that an expansion of the fire is intended? The CIA, having been involved in insurgent Syrian cells since the 1990s, is hardly stirred by its eastward spread.

The objective is well worth offending the sensibilities of "Bible-clinging" veterans: Ensure that Damascus, even if it remains steadfast under Assad the son, will never fully recover from the damage dealt.

Such gives Israel and its colony in the Pentagon more agency than it ever had before. Lebanon, in particular, will be open for grabs in the coming decade. I am just thrilled to see what Shillary Clinton will spearhead, if elected.

-
Don't call the perpetrator behind the Wikipedia edits an "idiot"; he has a clear agenda. Anyway, I don't understand the purpose behind the ISIL having a separate column on the chart. I could find it out by viewing the talk page but, considering all this talk about edits, I would prefer to avoid the shitstorm.
User avatar #65018 to #65012 - alimais (06/29/2014) [-]
I know that,
User avatar #64974 to #64969 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
We can't get involved in another war with so many real problems we have here.
User avatar #64976 to #64974 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
Yes, but with that they lay the seeds for the next conflict to come and like in Iraq I think the US should reap what they sow
User avatar #64978 to #64976 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
Their problem not ours
User avatar #64979 to #64978 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
You can't just tip over someones glass and say "wipe it up yourself ! your problem not mine"
User avatar #64980 to #64979 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
so we act and tip over more glasses?
#64981 to #64980 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
There was a whole jug already tipped over by removing Hussein.

Let me remind you about the time the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan got aid worth 45$ Billion then you suddenly got the "Islamic State of Afghanistan" the original name was Democratic Republic of Afghanistan where women had rights and looked pretty western & Al-Qaeda was created and finally some phony towers got removed from New York.
User avatar #64982 to #64981 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
Again would creating a more bigger problem be worth it?
User avatar #64986 to #64982 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
By removing ISIS who are outright massmurders worse than any Hollywood Nazis would be worth it because they also seek to get influence in Western countries so they should be put down before they get to be a much bigger problem.

Also by supporting "rebels" in Syria the US already tipped over a fuck ton of glasses.
User avatar #64995 to #64986 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
That's whole another pile of shit.
#64997 to #64995 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
Here is the map they have in mind for their Islamic state
User avatar #64998 to #64997 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
I'd rather Europe take care of it.
User avatar #64999 to #64998 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
I'd rather have NATO taking care of it.
User avatar #65000 to #64999 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
Hopefully.
User avatar #65001 to #65000 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
Which brings me to my next thread, I'm going to do now
#64953 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
What's your stance on Monsanto or stuff like Aspartame ?
User avatar #64965 to #64953 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
Monsanto is only able to get away with shit because the government enforces their patents.
#64967 to #64965 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
Pink bubble is obligatory
User avatar #64975 to #64967 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
Corruption is the response of government expanding powers
#64952 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
What's your stance on Cannabis ?
User avatar #64966 to #64952 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
It should be legalized in the interest of civil liberty and economic liberty. The war on rugs has proven far too costly in upfront costs indirect costs and the cost of liberty.
User avatar #65015 to #64966 - lulzfornigeriagirl (06/29/2014) [-]
i love u, im glad ur back
User avatar #65016 to #65015 - undeadwill (06/29/2014) [-]
Me too.. Me too. Tumblr can burn.
User avatar #65097 to #65052 - undeadwill (07/01/2014) [-]
fucking tumblr man..
#64960 to #64952 - pebar (06/28/2014) [-]
Legalize all of it. Meth, heroin, everything.
If the government shut down Coca-Cola, Pepsi's profits would skyrocket ignoring antitrust laws
It's the same when government doesn't allow pharmaceutical companies to produce drugs. Gangs and drug cartels' profits skyrocket.
You could reduce A LOT of crime by cutting off their source of income.

Furthermore, our prisons are packed full of non-violent drug offenders, a lot of them are in for life due to minimum sentencing. The local paper here releases a list every couple months of the recent felonies in the area. Around 90% of them are drug possession.
Police actually get a lot of their income from confiscating other people's stuff related to drug crime. For example, the police can take your house if you sell a few ounces of weed on your front doorstep. That is just wrong IMO.

You cannot defeat the powers of the market. The more drug dealers you arrest, the less competition and supply you have, then you increase the price which increases the profitability of drug dealing, which then encourages more people to sell drugs.
User avatar #64951 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
thoughts on gun rights?
User avatar #64954 to #64951 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
They drastically lower the crime rate and statistically they safe MUCH more people per year than people kill.
User avatar #64955 to #64954 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
Would you be willing to allow military grade weapons into private hands?
User avatar #64956 to #64955 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
What do you consider as military grade weapons ?
User avatar #64959 to #64956 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
The same small arms the military uses
User avatar #64968 to #64959 - alimais (06/28/2014) [-]
Rifles & small arms are fine by me because if you happen to do a crime with a LEGALLY bought weapon it can be back-traced to you.
User avatar #64984 to #64968 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
What about a heavy full auto machine gun?
User avatar #64987 to #64984 - teranin ONLINE (06/28/2014) [-]
A heavy full auto machine gun is impractical for criminal use, and at current in the USA it requires some significant licensing to purchase. In the USA you can privately own a tank, here's a cool place where you can buy them www.mortarinvestments.eu/products/tanks-2/t-34-35

I really want 44 grand to get my own T-34
User avatar #64993 to #64987 - undeadwill (06/28/2014) [-]
Same.
 Friends (0)