If those people could sign waivers refusing any medical care they don’t pre pay for, waiving any physical damages if they aren’t at fault (I shouldn’t have to pay for your preventable injuries just because we crashed) and hospitals honor those waivers…just a dot on your license that says if your wallet is empty you agree to be a live organ donor…I’d agree.
Since that’s not the case and as often as not the paying public ends up footing the bill in one way or another for the irresponsible behavior like not wearing a seat belt, mandating seat belt usage seems 100% reasonable.
Also, since most learning/teaching is by example, it’s near child abuse to not wear it with kids in the car. Akin to shooting drugs or playing Russian roulette in front of them….taking a deadly risk for no purpose.

I can't imagine this is anything more than playing Russian roulette with your balls. Or, you know, video editing.

Let me try that again. FAAAAAAAAAKKKKEEEEEEEEEE!!111!

Exploding kittens just turns into me screaming over and over "NO, YOUR TURN IS OVER AFTER YOU DRAW A CARD. NO, YOU DREW A CARD NOW, NOW YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING BECAUSE YOUR TURN IS OVER. I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S DIFFERENT FROM MOST CARD GAMES B/C YOU DRAWING ENDS YOUR TURN, IT'S LIKE RUSSIAN ROULETTE."

"I just drew a card, so can I..."

"END YOUR TURN? YES."

People love sandbox survival and they love space exploration and they fell in love with the idea of what this game could be. The magazines talked about it like evangelical christians talk about the rapture - this is the end of gaming as we know it and it's going to change everything! And the internet fandom descended with prepubescent fury on anyone that dared suggest the emperor was, in fact, nekkid.

This long video about NMS covers it extremely well, but i'll cut a long story short. There was something veeery slightly disingenuous about the moratoriums placed on reviews, lack of pre-release review versions, and significant backtracking and retconning of promises made by lead designer(? - but definite spokesperson) Sean Murray. The clean cut, well spoken, awkwardly charming Sean Murray. Who I think understood as the release date got closer that a lot of people were not going to be happy with him, because in his interviews he started to look more and more like De Niro playing Russian roulette in The Deer Hunter.

Extra things that immediately pissed me off before i refunded it:
- Menu stuff can appear offscreen if you open it by the edges in 2016
- Can't alt tab in full screen
- Run in borderless window to solve it, performance hit
- i7 6700k, Maximus viii Hero mobo and a GTX 1080 but yes, performance hit and general poor performance anyway
- Can't bind actions to thumb buttons in 2016
- Mouse sensitivity goes from 0 to 100. Changing my sensitivity from 100 to 0 didn't even half the turning speed in game, I had to alt tab to manually change the DPI in razer synapse, which is where i discovered i couldn't alt-tab.

All this for £40? Overwatch cost £30.

They made a lot of money off this, but I'm afraid for me they did it through unfair means. If you check out the quotes from Murray and what the game actually is, there's a huge disparity and the backtracking as release date approached was the final evidence.

I say we just gas all these gamer kids. And as they're dying, they can watch us smashing every cellphone in the world with a baseball bat and then collectively blow our brains out Russian Roulette style and then whoever survives rebuilds.

Then online games will be fun again.

Movies where Vancouver played itself:

That Cold Day in the Park
Russian Roulette
Shoot to Kill

Blockbusters all.

Haha, yeah, I guess you're right. This is the first time anybody has made a mockery of transgendered identities, so they should just suck it up! Their number just happened to be up, in the Russian roulette that is comedy... It's not like there's a widespread history of that kind of jokes, or a history of discrimination, violence, and suicidal depression to go with it.

Again, I'm not advocating that the joke should be cut, because I don't know the context and I imagine whatever comedy comes out of Clint Eastwood will be asinine at best anyway. I do take issue with Maher's disingenuous pretense at not understanding what the offensive part of the joke was. He's literally saying "That joke was not an insult, it was not demeaning," when it obviously was. It played to the bigoted perception that transgendered women are men pretending to be women, which is both widely held and demeaning. He can defend it, but I don't see why he's pretending not to understand it.

Haha! I think it'd be a riot (as long as I hold back my concerns about teaching my boys how fun a game of Russian Roulette would be).

Not available in the US it seems.

Well, thank you for the compliment, fellow masterdebater.
Or did you mean "masturbator"? Then I'd have to disagree, I'm certainly not bad at that.

Yeah, my post was super hyperbolic but it was just a continuation of the thinking going on here. I took it to the next level. The basic message I took from this thread was "Fuck that guy, he's an insurance scammer and got what he deserved!"
I disagree.
First of all, his crime (scamming people out of money) makes him a huge asshole and definately someone I wish not much well being in general. However, he was slowly run over by a car! You have to do some really awful shit to deserve that kind of punishment. If that man was the pope, I'd have applauded the lady and asked her for a re-run because the pope supports child rapists. If that man was Jeffrey Dahmer, I'd ask if I could have a go. But he's, as far as we know, neither a rapist or murderer or anything else as horrible. He could be dead. He could be a vegetable. He could be disabled. None of that is a punishment fitting his crime. Not even a Bernie Madoff deserves that.
The second thing is this whole "he did something stupid and now he got what he deserves" debate. Look, I'm a person of schadenfreude. I have sadistic personality traits that fill my shrivelled, black heart with gleeful joy everytime somebody gets hurt. But there are limits.
My examples are horrible and gross but what sets them apart from what this guy did is mainly they're not criminal activities. Sure, if you shoot at cops and get shot, you deserve that. You committed and act of agression and got pwned. That man was not agressive towards anyone.
He didn't lay under a moving car, he lay beside a standing car that then rolled over him while making a turn because the driver didn't notice him. Misjudgement on his part? Sure. The same as playing russian roulette or shooting at cops? Nope. That's because his activity, running into a standing or slowly moving car and pretending to be hit, doesn't include certain death as certain possibility.
The only reason people here are so comfortable with this man getting run over is because he's an asshole criminal. If that would've happened to him while he was pulling an internet prank, everyone would be horrified. Imagine that guy wearing a ridiculous costume and talking into the camera at the beginning of the video how he'll make that woman think she hit him with the car and what a great prank that'll be. Is he still getting what he deserves?
People give a shit about the man in the terrible accident because they made a judgement that he is a criminal and not worth it.
See, John Oliver has a point when talking about prisons.
I saw a video of a man getting run over. It didn't upset me but the reactions to it did.

Wow yourself.

Those are mostly really horrible examples and gross misinterpretation of things that've been said here.

Most of the things you're talking about are not even closely related to someone putting themselves into a position of imminent danger.

Smokers, second-hand smoking, addiction, extreme sporting, and *anyone* who does *anything* *potentially* dangerous? Say what? Your nonsensical examples have no relation whatsoever to what I've been discussing.

Laying under a moving car or playing Russian roulette or climbing into an alligator pit or shooting at cops with machine guns... Yes, those kinds of things are exactly the same as someone with a lifetime of addiction or who uses safety gear and expertise with a reasonable expectation they'll walk away from their sporting activity unharmed. Right? Pshaw.

You're either doing a really bad job of trolling or just a really bad masterdebater.

As Clint Eastwood said as William Munny:

Deserve's got nothing to do with it.

I feel like I've tried to make this rather fine point a lot over the years on the Sift: I'm not saying he *should* or *deserves to* be run over by a car for trying to pull a con.

What I'm saying is he put himself into a situation where he could get run over by a car and did so of his own volition with blatant malicious intent. The fact that his pretending to get run over by a car actually resulted in him getting run over by a car yields zero sympathy with me.

Plus, I'm not sure what country you're in or if you're automotively insured, but if you are at fault of hitting someone with your car, you'll be screwed with insurance and paying a significantly higher rater for several years to come. It's not like a bank where your money is insured by the federal government and a robbery of the vault wouldn't affect you; the victim of an insurance scam is directly, immediately, and significantly fucked.

(Someone used my name when they were apparently at fault in an accident before I'd ever gotten my first insurance policy, and when I did first try to get insured, my premium was something like triple what it would've cost me otherwise.)

Again, not saying that ^that means he deserves to be crushed by a car, but he did it to himself. (Likewise, if he was playing Russian roulette and shot himself in the head, I wouldn't feel bad for him.)

You reap what you sow.

Your video, "Russian Roulette" - (Short Romantic Film, Watch to The End), has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Fair enough, I'm basically a pacifist and wouldn't hit anyone anyway.
But I don't see this as any different than playing Russian roulette.
A complete disdain for the value of a person's life.

Whose up for a game of Russian roulette?

Ground cinnamon actually have barbs much like porcupine quills. Once they get sucked into your lungs, they cling to the walls of your lungs and can cause serious permanent damage.

I'm glad this video was posted. Not because it was funny, but because it serves as warning to all the idiots that plan to try this.

The "Cinnamon Challenge" is a challenge, like "Russian Roulette" is a challenge. OK, maybe not quite that bad, but just as stupid.

This is the best breakdown on the toxicity of cinnamon I could find:
Can the cinnamon challenge kill you? -
http://www.mnn.com/health/fitness-well-being/stories/can-the-cinnamon-challenge-kill-you