Upload
Login or register

Endofzeeworld

Last status update:
-
Date Signed Up:1/15/2010
Last Login:9/24/2016
Stats
Comment Ranking:#1557
Highest Content Rank:#5597
Highest Comment Rank:#793
Content Thumbs: 59 total,  92 ,  33
Comment Thumbs: 12820 total,  15981 ,  3161
Content Level Progress: 0% (0/5)
Level 1 Content: New Here → Level 2 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 78.4% (392/500)
Level 310 Comments: Wizard → Level 311 Comments: Wizard
Subscribers:1
Content Views:6480
Times Content Favorited:4 times
Total Comments Made:4732
FJ Points:11118

latest user's comments

#11 - >censors your right to free speech I'm sorry, what? How?  [+] (14 replies) 6 hours ago on 'Murica! +10
User avatar
#40 - mcstorms (3 hours ago) [-]
Cant even say Fuck on live TV. You don't even need another example.
#43 - xxsikoticxx (3 hours ago) [-]
If this was like, 4 or 5 years ago then yeah TV networks could be fined for cursing and nudity by the FCC, but afaik that was prohibited by the supreme court.
User avatar
#95 - mcstorms (3 minutes ago) [-]
Then why to this day can we still no longer do it? Theres censored versions od thousands of movies that air everyday.
#42 - xxsikoticxx (3 hours ago) [-]
But that isn't related to free speech... the government did nothing to him. A television company has the right to take you off the air for whatever reason they want. Free speech is only related to government censorship.
User avatar
#44 - pokemonstheshiz (3 hours ago) [-]
To be fair, a lot of that may be fear of fines from the FCC. While they don't ban things, they do restrict profanity/indecency during daylight hours
#45 - xxsikoticxx (3 hours ago) [-]
Didn't actually know that was a thing, I forgot how annoying the "think of the children" argument is.
User avatar
#46 - pokemonstheshiz (3 hours ago) [-]
I honestly have no idea how it still holds up. My parents had channels locked when I was a kid, and that was over 10 years ago. There's no realistic reason to not leave the judgement up to parents.
#47 - xxsikoticxx (2 hours ago) [-]
Completely agree, I'm getting a lot of old/conflicting answers when I try to look it up but oh well, makes me glad that I got rid of cable a couple years ago.
#39 - furfirerace (3 hours ago) [-]
>"nigger"
>police arrest you for hatespeech
#31 - anon (4 hours ago) [-]
Football player says blm is joke.
Has to take it back and apologize or be suspended or fired...
#36 - anon (3 hours ago) [-]
the State Nor Federal Government did not prosecute him...
#33 - landcucumber (4 hours ago) [-]
That's not censorship. That is free market at work. Have a right to say whatever you want. However that does not make you immune to consequences. Only protected from the government.
#12 - logicalreason (6 hours ago) [-]
You arent serious are you?
#87 - hurpfry (19 minutes ago) [-]
Maybe instead of just saying 'lolno' you should provide some backup for your case.
#17 - Fair point, but I think that while they're being heard, they d…  [+] (3 replies) 09/24/2016 on Changing the World +3
#23 - babysared (09/24/2016) [-]
#22 - babysared (09/24/2016) [-]
Part of that could be that they haven't been specific other than "stop racism" and "stop police killing Blacks".
They did set out a specific list of demands to the Dallas police department, and the chief responded to every single one.

Also, regarding the mlk speech, it's been horrendously cherry picked by both sides. If you get a chance to read it in it's entirety, it's very good. I'll attach screenshots of the portion that people always quote.

www.gphistorical.org/mlk/mlkspeech/
User avatar
#42 - Endofzeeworld (19 hours ago) [-]
I think I pretty much covered what he meant there. That riots, while they cannot be condoned, cannot be ignored either. Also true, BLM is a disorganized mess that have no real leadership. I also think that rioters in a lot of cases are just opportunistic criminals.
#15 - Well the point is to try to be sympathetic to the reasons that…  [+] (5 replies) 09/24/2016 on Changing the World +5
#16 - nanjeeng (09/24/2016) [-]
I think its hard to say that these specific rioters are unheard since BLM has been attracting national media attention for the past few years, I'm not sure how much more heard someone could be than national media attention. International media attention?
User avatar
#17 - Endofzeeworld (09/24/2016) [-]
Fair point, but I think that while they're being heard, they don't feel like they're really being listening to, y'know? Like even though they're getting attention, nothing is being done to address the issues they feel need addressing.
#23 - babysared (09/24/2016) [-]
#22 - babysared (09/24/2016) [-]
Part of that could be that they haven't been specific other than "stop racism" and "stop police killing Blacks".
They did set out a specific list of demands to the Dallas police department, and the chief responded to every single one.

Also, regarding the mlk speech, it's been horrendously cherry picked by both sides. If you get a chance to read it in it's entirety, it's very good. I'll attach screenshots of the portion that people always quote.

www.gphistorical.org/mlk/mlkspeech/
User avatar
#42 - Endofzeeworld (19 hours ago) [-]
I think I pretty much covered what he meant there. That riots, while they cannot be condoned, cannot be ignored either. Also true, BLM is a disorganized mess that have no real leadership. I also think that rioters in a lot of cases are just opportunistic criminals.