Your video, Doug Stanhope - Mentally Disturbed vs Mentally Challenged, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 41 Badge!

@Mordhaus There are plenty of mentally disturbed people who will "resist" and provide enough fodder for the cellphones to keep the momentum going to clean up this mess we are in.

Don't resist, dude. Don't be a stat.

https://www.facebook.com/humansofnewyork/photos/a.102107073196735.4429.102099916530784/1383312675076162/?type=3&theater


(That guy lying on the ground wasn't being shot at, it was the other guy. What is so horrible about that particular situation was that the attendant was explaining the situation and he was ignored. You know because he was black. To me, that situation is the worst case of racism ever -- that a working black professional is not believed when he explains the situation.)

In your scenario, he has an emphatic yes, yes, yes, I want to drink tea with you, he has done his due diligence.

Until we get less crazy around sex in this Puritan country, and even after, there will be mentally disturbed people who say yes and then say no.

But here's something you probably don't know. Women are conditioned to be polite. They are conditioned to be nice. They say no while smiling, and that is a definite mixed message. As someone "joked" already on this comment stream, what about the women who say no but really mean yes?

All the stuff in the prior paragraph is NOT CONSENT to drink tea.

So yeah, it sucks eggs large that there are women out there who don't take responsibility for their own choices, and for whatever fucked up reason, change their mind later.

But those are the minority, dear Scud.

The majority are women who smiling say no and don't speak up while, in their minds, they are having tea forced upon them. Or who go paralyzed and are silent. That happens. That happens a crushingly high number of times in this world.

Here's a true story, to give you a peek into how screwed up we train our young women to be. I heard this in a self defense class. A young woman was held in a dorm room for two days, having tea forced on her repeatedly. She could hear people walking in the hallway, who could have come to her aid. Why didn't she yell out? If she could hear them, then they could hear her. The guy didn't have weapon, just the threat of physical force. So why didn't she yell out for help?

She didn't want to make a scene.

Isn't that awful? Isn't that crappy?

We tell our girls to be nice and pleasant. And the message gets perverted, yeah?

The plus side is she got herself to a really good self defense class that taught her to speak up and make a scene and gave her some physical skills to deal with any tea forcing behavior. It won't be happening to her again.

But I'm telling you, dear Scud. This nice pleasant woman, if she had been asked, would have said no, no thank, I don't want any tea. If she was asked. And you don't know if you have a meek person or a loudmouth like me. So you need to ask. And ask again. And make it fun while you ask, because it is sexy as hell to say yes, please, more tea. Give me more tea. Put that tea right there.

But if the guy doesn't even know he's actually forcing her to drink tea, how much responsibility can the guy be reasonably expected to take on? She says yes, perhaps even emphatically so and then gives no indication that she has changed her mind all throughout the act and only changes her mind the morning after.
According to this video he did everything he should have and yet he may still wind up being accused of forcing tea on someone.
As for the mentally disturbed, there are many people with mental conditions that can seem perfectly normal on the outside. You have to crank the handle a good number of times before the song ends and the Jack pops out of the box.

Yeah, but what is more interesting is to ask WHY there are takesies backsies.

And if as the tea maker you really understand that can happen, and don't let tea making become your biological imperative, and help stop the tea shaming that this society engages is, I'll repeat myself. Because it is an important point to really let land.

There will be much less takesies backsies if everyone slows down and really consents to drinking tea. (And much less forced tea drinking, where the guy doesn't even know he is forcing the tea drinking and can play all butt hurt -- she said she wanted tea!)

There are mentally disturbed people of both genders who get involved in tea drinking. Both genders need to be more careful about who they drink tea with, who they are alone with.

The psycho ex bit mirrors very closely an old video and meme of a slightly... obsessive girl who made a nude video of herself where she talks crazy to the camera. this was passed around the internet and set to, for example, the theme from Requiem for a Dream, to illustrate her creepy crazy. Not a great thing to admit to watching, what with the possible mental disturbance and the public mocking of private nudity and all... But it got much worse when it turned out that she was apparently in eighth grade when she made the video. Extra ew, then.

I live in Finland, one of the top countries on guns per capita. Also one the lowest gun crimes per capita. Very strict gun control, in fact, i can't own a single casing, let alone live bullet. All have to be licensed, all counted, no guns licenses without a hunting or shooting club membership, no guns without proper training. No backyard sales, not even ammo. We have long hunting tradition. Also a long militia background, guns and the need for them are acknowledged in every part of our culture and history, armed uprisings (albeit all of them failed) against oppressive conquerors are our heroes.. And of course that one little squirmish against Soviet Union, we got thru with it with guns. But the tools they used are not worshiped, just appreciated as good tools.

Hand guns are not for hunting and as such, they are even more controlled. No ONE has ever raised an opinion that our freedoms are being oppressed by our gun laws. Overwhelming majority likes them the way they are, only wanting more control on mentally disturbed individuals. Some of course want no guns at all and very small portion wants guns for all. But majority and i mean majority as in +80% are very happy the way things are now. If i want to start hunting or shooting as a sport; i can. I can't, however, get a gun just because i want one.

Also, front doors in Finland are sturdy enough that you can't just kick it in... Something to think about, we got the best locks in the business (google abloy, 99,99% of our locks are ABLOY). In fact, and this is coming from experience, our burglars don't pick locks. They remove the whole doorframe with hydraulic jacks (or remove the whole lockbase and part of the door with tons of force.. or drill the lock)..Locksmiths here don't have lockpicks as the locks are protected very well against lockpicking, in fact abloy is one of the benchmarks on lockpickers and it still takes hours. Instead locksmiths carry a big ass cordless drill with the hardest drillbits you can find; they drill out and replace the whole cylinder and it's noisy as hell. That's what our doors are like, maybe there is some answer there; you don't feel afraid when your front door can take a bear.

The entire purpose of a police force is to put themselves in harms way to protect the public.

If he had a gun, I would completely agree with you. Hell, if he was rushing at them with the knife brandished, I would completely agree with you. Are you seriously claiming that between two cops one couldn't have tasered him with the other ready to shoot if it didn't work?

This was a clearly mentally disturbed individual and all the cops here did was make the situation worse with by immediately escalating things.

The fallacy though is that there is a strong anti-gun movement. There isn't The pro-gun people desperately cling to that strawman fallacy any time there is a call for gun control.

The number of people who are actually "anti-gun" in the US are too small to politically matter, but who knows, as @ChaosEngine pointed out, maybe that will change someday as attitudes and technology changes, but that day is not today.

However, the majority of people ARE for gun control/regulation. The vast majority of Americans have no problem with armed citizenry. The debate is ACTUALLY about the level of armament. They want stiffer controls to keep them out of the hands of criminals and the mentally disturbed. And maybe some required training/certification for those that do choose to own firearms, just like we test periodically for drivers licenses.

Even the pro-gun people should (I hope) agree that nuclear arms should be under tight control and not in the hands of civilians. Should a civilian be able to own a cruise missile? a tank? A battleship cannon? How about one of those new magnetic rail cannons being developed? If you agree that these types of weapons should not be used by civvies, then you are pro-gun control.

The question is just one of degree. I completely agree that "assault" weapons is too vague a term and stricter definitions need to be created to define what civvies should and shouldn't have.

Precedent is already set. We have a constitutional right to bear arms as well as many other rights, but rights have been taken away countless times (with the consent of the governed) for people who have proven that they can be a harm to others, so you can't really argue that the 2nd amendment is inalienable. Many, if not all, rights have conditions to them.

There are ALWAYS exceptions.

I've harped on it before and I'll harp on it again. Bill Maher is exactly right. There is no "anti-gun" party. We have a "loves guns" party and a "likes guns" party.

There is NO significant anti-gun movement in America. But the pro-gun people are scared so they try to bogeyman you into thinking there is.

You know that recently in China a man walked into a school and stabbed 22 kids? Guess what, they all survived. (See this UK Guardian article for more info). You're right, taking away the guns won't stop people from being violent but it will drastically reduce their capabilities for committing mass fatalities on the scale of Sandy Hook.

About banning assault rifles--since nearly all gun deaths in the U.S. occur because of handguns, not rifles, making handguns illegal would actually make far more logical sense--not that it would ever happen in the U.S., mind you.

About the "mentally disturbed" comment: less than 4% of violent crimes in the U.S. are committed by those with a mental illness. Identifying those "mentally disturbed" as you called them that will actually commit a violent act is not nearly as easy as it sounds; you might want to read this NY Times piece on the subject. Alcohol and drug use is actually a much better predictor of violent acts than mental illness is.

Back on topic to this clip--I'm saddened that Jon Stewart has fallen into the trap of thinking of this as a "gun control" issue. It isn't. There are already millions of guns in circulation, many of which are unregistered and would be impossible to confiscate in the case of a ban. The horse is out of the barn already, and it's far too late to start talking about shutting the doors. We need instead to be addressing the issue of why people are using the guns to commit crimes in the first place: economic disparity, the war on drugs, a culture that glorifies violence and "getting back" at the other guy, a mental health system that has difficulty both identifying and treating those with violent tendencies, etc.

People want the quick fix, the easy solution--there isn't one. The sooner Stewart, Obama, the NRA, and the rest of the U.S. figures that out, the sooner we can start having a real discussion about how to make our society a better and safer place.

I think we deffo need to step up stopping people who are mentally disturbed from getting firearms

Also stop the gunshow loophole as well

But banning assault rifles or large capacity magazines won't do anything to stem the violence at all. People will just bring improvised weapons to their place of slaughter.

Next thing you know it'll be people upset about modifying certain glocks to be fully auto with extended clips. Then they'll start banning handguns.

1% -- take note! You are mentally disturbed.

This chick is the oldest looking "teenager" I've ever seen. She looks super tense all the time too. This is just a sad display of mental disturbance. What does she hope to get out of these videos?

I'm confused, at the end of the video it's the same mentally disturbed guy who caused all that trouble and the police didn't cart him off? They just let him back in the restaurant?

>> ^residue:

What if I have diarrhea real bad and I'm struggling to get across the road to the bathroom emporium and I'm moving kind of slow. Here comes ole ForgedReality in his Mazda Miata on an ego trip thinking everyone is out to get him so you clip me with a mirror. How's that responsible? If you're driving a car, you have a personal responsibiliy to not hit people with it regardless of what you THINK their intentions are.
And for the record, I've been clipped twice by a mirror while walking on the side of the road and hit with a bumper since I was apparently crossing too slow for some retard who thinks his car is a toy


haha.. Mazda Miata. I drive a sport pickup.

But if you've been hit that many times, it tells me that maybe you shouldn't be playing in traffic, pretending you're a vroom-vroom-car. I'm considerate of drivers when I'm walking. I get the fuck out of their way as quickly as I can, say if I'm walking by a shopping center driveway, or thru a parking lot, or even a crosswalk or something.

I know how annoying it is to have some thug wigger gangster punk bitch taking his sweet time because he thinks he's "all that," and doesn't take other people into consideration. It's the same kind of person who doesn't wave to the person who politely let them merge in a line of traffic, or the guy who doesn't even make a "thank you" gesture when someone stops to let you walk by.

It's all about a general deficit of respect that stupid people have grown up with the last couple generations. Everybody's out for themselves, and it's just "me, me, me" as if nobody else even matters.

So yes, if someone hits you with their car, they're either homicidal, mentally disturbed, or, much more likely, you're just a prick.

-edit-
Also, I guess to more directly answer your question: If it appears you're struggling to cross the road, limping and grasping at your buttcheeks, yeah, I'll be like, "damn that motherfucker really has to take a shit!" I might even stop to help you across, so long as you promise not to spray rectal treasure all over me in the process.

I'm talking about the pieces of shit (usually black, for some reason) that walk DOWN the street, IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD, not even really making an effort to get to one side or the other. They look back at you, like, "wutchoo gon' do, honkey?" and keep slowly walking down the street, like they aren't gunna move for you, so you better go AROUND them. Okay, so now you're forcing me into the oncoming lane because you're a dick? Fuck you. You're not endangering MY safety; you're risking me blowing a fuse and endangering YOURS.