Agreed. It's understandable if someone suffers enough that the potential risks are acceptable to them.

This commercial's selling point, though, seems to be "Oh darn, because your arms are red you're too embarrassed to go outside with all your friends who are having lots of fun. Take this medicine and *maybe* you'll be *partially* better in 4 months and you can wear short sleeves or maybe you'll die. Yay!"

Ugh kids of this generation...GO OUTSIDE!

Go outside?

Dog: "Thanks for that. Put me down first next time, ok? We have super hearing... remember? And am I supposed to be happy that some little mutt is going to be slobbering on me and grabbing my tail? I think I just wanna go outside now. Yeah, I'm so happy for you. Now put me down, please."

The federal courts don't sell seeds and they cannot be sued

Anyways, the problem with the courts is that they deal with issues that are not catching up with the times. Gay marriage? Too new a civil rights issue. Corporations are people? Yeah, but that's okay because it doesn't take away our democracy, does it? Damn goggle won't tell me!

If we want to truly look at government the way you do (That it can in no way go outside of it's scope for any reason) then you are effectively saying much with this myopic view--in my opinion. For example, in a free market capitalism, it is not the governments job to throw up one roadblock to any form of success. Monopolies are currently discouraged even though it is not the job of the government at all to do so. It's counter to capitalism. Free enterprise should be ruthless and profit driven. It's only checks and balances should be the consumers. One monopoly should have already risen to take over all America's communications, industrial and consumer services. Another monopoly for natural resources; food and gas, etc.

This is the true result of competition. One chess player wins the tournament and takes home the prize, the others lose.

Then when these two companies want to discourage protests and such, they should be able to block out entire neighborhood's food supplies and starve them to death. (This has happened in other countries since the beginning of time--though mostly government owned there is no reason a corporation cannot do this.) After all, it's not their job to provide people food--they are just a business and if they want to pull their business, meh. After all, the people dying are competing with the corporation.

You may find this analogy off track, or even silly, but I am trying to point out something serious. Government either changes with times or we destroy ourselves.

Ps, wrote rather quickly because I gtg. Wife and kids stuff.

Yeah, this video can suck a dick.

"Never drink coke, it's unhealthy."
Oh, and:
Never eat any other sugary foods...or high fat foods
Never drink alcohol
Never go outside without sunblock
Never watch tv or play video games
Never stay up too late
Never drink from plastic containers, or aluminum
Never drive when you can bicycle
Never bicycle when you can walk
Never live where airborne polutants are too concentrated
ONLY do things that promote a healthy body and lifestyle.

The message should be about healthy balance, not demonizing certain choices.

I keep hearing how this is going live...don't worry it'll be line in two weeks...next week...tomorrow. Months go by and still no Ingress, I've about given up on going outside completely!

After @Sagemind came out as the uberfather of geekdom I feel the need to remind you that GOING OUTSIDE is also very important.
Just saying

I was waiting for the cat to go outside for about 5 seconds, saying fuck it, and then coming back it because it's too hot outdoors.

>> ^Stormsinger:

I have personally witnessed one murder and one attempted murder, both committed with handguns. I have yet to witness a "defensive" use of a handgun.
There are just too many morons out there, for the number of guns circulating around.

Oh, so since you haven't personally witnessed a gun being used in self defense, it must not happen at all. I personally haven't witnessed a police officer stopping a crime, so why do we need them?

>> ^arekin:

You know taking the deathcows arguments into account (though I don't agree with them), Guns are meant to be fired. The guy only has two arms. I've heard the argument "what about his friends?" If they wanted to fire a gun they probably already have one. So either the guy has to grow more arms or hes just carrying around alot of extra weight.
Buy more clips and less guns.


I like to play video games, but by your logic, one game is enough. Also, stamp collectors, they only have two eyes, so why do they need so many stamps?

>> ^L0cky:
And you want to live in a country where every child is taught how to use a firearm?
I'd prefer a society where my kids play too much video games, so I tell them enough already go outside and play!
I'd rather that than feel like I live in a society where I have to teach a seven year old how to kill people (sorry, defend oneself with a deadly weapon).
You know, like Liberia or Mozambique.


No one said anything about teaching a child how to use a gun. You have lots of things in your house that are deadly to kids (knives, chemicals, etc.), and I hope you would teach them that those things are dangerous and not to be played with rather than hiding them and hoping they wont find them. Why would a gun be any different?

Around 6% of US Americans hunt, yet around 34% own a gun; therefore around 82% of gun owners own a gun for something other than hunting. Bringing up hunting is just avoiding the issue.

Besides, I don't think that guy's UZI is for hunting rabbits.

Also, you don't need to teach children how to safely use firearms if they don't have access to firearms. Kinda like how you don't need to teach them how to safely use a particle accelerator, even though they too are dangerous.
>> ^colt45:

>> ^L0cky:
So you're offering free classes? And you want to live in a country where every child is taught how to use a firearm?
I'd prefer a society where my kids play too much video games, so I tell them enough already go outside and play!
I'd rather that than feel like I live in a society where I have to teach a seven year old how to kill people (sorry, defend oneself with a deadly weapon).
You know, like Liberia or Mozambique.

I don't know enough about firearms, and own none. I'm hardly qualified. Also, please stop putting words in my mouth. I want to live in a civilized country, where people understand PROPER use of, and care for, firearms, including safety, control, and discipline.
Your obsession with murder is a bit concerning. Firearms are very effective at hunting. They are great at providing food from that use. Why you are so obsessed with war and murder, I really don't know. Should you be on a watch list?

>> ^L0cky:
So you're offering free classes? And you want to live in a country where every child is taught how to use a firearm?
I'd prefer a society where my kids play too much video games, so I tell them enough already go outside and play!
I'd rather that than feel like I live in a society where I have to teach a seven year old how to kill people (sorry, defend oneself with a deadly weapon).
You know, like Liberia or Mozambique.


I don't know enough about firearms, and own none. I'm hardly qualified. Also, please stop putting words in my mouth. I want to live in a civilized country, where people understand PROPER use of, and care for, firearms, including safety, control, and discipline.

Your obsession with murder is a bit concerning. Firearms are very effective at hunting. They are great at providing food from that use. Why you are so obsessed with war and murder, I really don't know. Should you be on a watch list?

>> ^Barseps:

Potential international enemies will think TWICE before invading America because they are the most heavily armed civilian population on Earth.

This isn't paranoia?

The USA has the largest military in the world, by a factor of about a zillion. How exactly do you envisage this nightmare scenario playing out, and who is the enemy?

Mexicans? Canadians?

If it's anyone else I'm sure you'll have plenty of time to enlist in the army, learn how to use a weapon, and do your part as a soldier rather than a cowboy.

[spoiler]It's not going to happen. Really.[/spoiler]

>> ^colt45:

Children who are not taught properly about firearms are, generally, viewing them as toys to play with. Children who are properly taught about firearm safety, use, etc., are much more likely to view them properly; as very dangerous tools.


So you're offering free classes? And you want to live in a country where every child is taught how to use a firearm?

I'd prefer a society where my kids play too much video games, so I tell them enough already go outside and play!

I'd rather that than feel like I live in a society where I have to teach a seven year old how to kill people (sorry, defend oneself with a deadly weapon).

You know, like Liberia or Mozambique.