Click to expand


Last status update:
Personal Info
Gender: male
Date Signed Up:8/18/2010
Last Login:10/17/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Thumbs: 404 total,  485 ,  81
Comment Thumbs: 1833 total,  2020 ,  187
Content Level Progress: 40% (4/10)
Level 40 Content: Sammich eater → Level 41 Content: Sammich eater
Comment Level Progress: 22% (22/100)
Level 218 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 219 Comments: Comedic Genius
Content Views:26236
Times Content Favorited:9 times
Total Comments Made:388
FJ Points:1892

latest user's comments

#91 - Picture 03/31/2012 on If Snoop Dog was white +7
#510 - Comment deleted  [+] (17 new replies) 03/31/2012 on Oh SNAP +1
#541 - marcsmanx has deleted their comment.
User avatar #535 - ryanthemaniac (03/31/2012) [-]
I feel the same way. Anarchism would be much better for this country. There can't be corrupt leadership if there are no leaders. There can't be inequality if everybody has the same level of social, political, and economic power. All governments have done is wage unnecessary wars to protect their interests, and yet claim it's "for the people". If government were removed, and the people ACTUALLY had the power they deserve, war would cease, globalization would stop, and crime would plummet. And to "doodthedud", actually study up on Anarchism, and quit be a dipshit. Good day to both of you ;)
#543 - John Cena (03/31/2012) [-]
rofl crime will plummet??? are you fucking stupid, if their was no government i would loot and rape every family on my block
User avatar #556 - ryanthemaniac (03/31/2012) [-]
The only reason why crime exists is because government creates unequal and unfair laws which deprive a person of all possible opportunity. So, people get desperate enough to commit crime. Besides, if a crime were to be committed in an anarchist society, that criminal would be dealt with by an assembly of his/her peers. The criminal would have a chance to plead his/her case and defend himself/herself. Then, the people and community affected by the crime would decide on a ruling (most likely in an anarchist society either exile, rehabilitation, or community service). Sounds much more fair and less expensive than our current criminal justice system (if you study closely, is actually quite fucked up). Again, good day to you, sir. ;)
User avatar #549 - jewninja (03/31/2012) [-]
not if everyone had free access to armaments, its less appealing to steal from a house if everyone's locked and loaded
ps how much do cops help during robberies or rapes?
User avatar #599 - houseofbrick (03/31/2012) [-]
Most robberies happen when nobody's at home. Having more people with guns would just mean those guns are stolen, too, and the family's out on a couple extra hundred dollars.
User avatar #622 - jewninja (03/31/2012) [-]
Then let us look only to those cases where there is a violent offense that a person could be 'saved' from, how often do police prevent violent crime as opposed to mop up the evidence later? And in these situations, how would they have turned out if the 'victim' was carrying and trained in the use of his/her firearm? Also how many less criminals would break into a house if there was a chance someone was home, cleaning their .38?
Also if you have a proper gun safe it's kinda hard to steal guns, not impossible, but still.
User avatar #623 - houseofbrick (03/31/2012) [-]
I wasn't arguing against guns, I was just clarifying a point that you glossed over.
User avatar #633 - jewninja (03/31/2012) [-]
People aren't always home, but if the chance of someone being home is coupled with the chance that that person is armed and educated in the use of that armament is increased, the deterrent against home invasion is increased. Would you not agree?
#636 - houseofbrick (03/31/2012) [-]
I just said I wasn't arguing against it...
User avatar #643 - jewninja (03/31/2012) [-]
I understand you aren't arguing against guns, but your original comment seems to indicate that home invasions negate some of the positive aspects of gun ownership (ie it doesn't help [cause you're not there to cap some ass] and that the family loses money through the theft of the firearm), whereas I was trying to impress that these issues are not significant and in fact are further marginalized as an effect of an increase in gun ownership. You can't bring up a contrary point and then dodge defending it by saying you aren't arguing against my point.
User avatar #656 - houseofbrick (03/31/2012) [-]
Because it was an addendum to your post. You were weakening your own argument by ignoring something I thought was obvious, so I decided to help you out.

Also, sesquipedalian loquaciousness is only acceptable in two places: term papers and LikeASir posts.
User avatar #668 - jewninja (03/31/2012) [-]
I'm sorry that marginalized made you break out your big boy thesaurus, but sometimes large words are appropriate.
If you will note my post "not if everyone had free access to armaments, its less appealing to steal from a house if everyone's locked and loaded"
emphasis now on " its less appealing to steal from a house if everyone's locked and loaded"
The legitimacy (correctness) of this point does not correlate with your idea that robberies happen when people are out. I did not say, people will keep robbers out, I said it would be an effective deterrent if ownership increases. My later points explore the reasons for my conclusion since you seemed to think that it was untrue. I never thought you were against guns, I was attempting to persuade you that gun ownership decreases home invasion and that the material I 'glossed over' was not relevant.
#681 - houseofbrick (03/31/2012) [-]
First off, no need to be an ass. I understood you perfectly, but just thought it made you look like a self-righteous prick.

Secondly, I'm going to put forth the point that it would not do a damned thing to home invasions. The experienced burglars are going to monitor their target and wait until nobody is home first before they do their business. The crackheads are crackheads and will rob the place regardless of gun ownership. Granted: this may prevent some from attempting home invasion in the first place, but the numbers will be so small as to be unimportant.
User avatar #1161 - jewninja (04/01/2012) [-]
You were critiquing my choice of words when the language being used was fairly simple, not sure where exactly my language became 'self-righteous' if you want to throw around the high handed insults at least get them right.
Also, I think we exhausted our other argument. I would contend that the number of people who would be deterred would be a significant amount, as the number of people who would be considered 'experienced' enough (in my opinion, I don't have crime stats) is the negligible one
#1172 - houseofbrick (04/01/2012) [-]
#520 - doodthedud (03/31/2012) [-]
probably because you're a retarded fuck

a shit leader is MUCH better than no leader
#68 - Picture 03/30/2012 on We all did this +9
#70 - Picture 03/30/2012 on /b/ NASA Program 0
#56 - Oh God! 03/30/2012 on Turns 13 +2
#55 - **DrGoggles rolled a random image posted in comment #493 at…  [+] (1 new reply) 03/30/2012 on Turns 13 +9
User avatar #56 - DrGoggles (03/30/2012) [-]
Oh God!
#128 - No! Not banana phone! I had forgotten about it for the longest…  [+] (1 new reply) 03/30/2012 on Random comp # 9 +2
User avatar #151 - garentei (03/30/2012) [-]
ring ring ring ring ring ring ring ring banana phone
#185 - Picture 03/30/2012 on spongebob +2
#167 - Picture 03/30/2012 on Always delete your history 0
#325 - lol, yea, when I first saw Young Frankenstein I couldn't help … 03/30/2012 on Oh Admin +1
#85 - Picture 03/30/2012 on I'm watching you 0
#83 - Picture  [+] (1 new reply) 03/30/2012 on I'm watching you +1
#91 - yourovertheyrenow (03/30/2012) [-]
my GIFt, to you
#306 - Picture  [+] (2 new replies) 03/30/2012 on Oh Admin 0
User avatar #319 - kazekage (03/30/2012) [-]
willy wonka?
User avatar #325 - DrGoggles (03/30/2012) [-]
lol, yea, when I first saw Young Frankenstein I couldn't help but think of Willy Wonka throughout the entire movie
#168 - Picture 03/30/2012 on 1ST place +4
#209 - Picture  [+] (2 new replies) 03/30/2012 on The Giving Tree 2 +6
User avatar #215 - synapse (03/30/2012) [-]
User avatar #210 - tommygunntyler (03/30/2012) [-]
lol oooh i remember that guy
#46 - Picture 03/30/2012 on ACK! Fish do it, too!!! +2
#28 - Picture 03/29/2012 on This is a Title +11
#27 - Picture 03/29/2012 on This is a Title +4
#48 - Picture 03/29/2012 on Metallica 0
#113 - Comment deleted  [+] (2 new replies) 03/29/2012 on My Dreams Crushed -4
User avatar #115 - temzlog (03/29/2012) [-]
wtf is dat shit ? stop with that kind of shit anon
#121 - ragingbrony (03/29/2012) [-]
That's not an Anon.
#186 - MFW I see my ex 03/29/2012 on When I see my ex +9
#344 - Picture 03/29/2012 on help him +1
#275 - Picture  [+] (2 new replies) 03/29/2012 on metal detector +11
#293 - thedavidzombie has deleted their comment.
User avatar #280 - godhatesusall (03/29/2012) [-]
#258 - Picture 03/29/2012 on Unhelpful High School Teacher 0
#299 - Picture 03/28/2012 on Taste Bud Orgasm +5


Total unique items point value: 3622 / Total items point value: 7896
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#4 - John Cena (06/03/2012) [-]

User avatar #1 - DrGigglez (01/02/2011) [-]
>Browse through comments
>Thought you were me
>Looked again
>One letter difference

User avatar #2 to #1 - DrGoggles (01/02/2011) [-]
For the lulz!
 Friends (0)