search results matching tag: the hunt

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (730)     Sift Talk (50)     Blogs (61)     Comments (1000)   

Jim Jefferies - Jordan Peterson on Free Speech

Fairbs says...

I agree people should be able to say what they want, but there should also be consequences

shouting over them doesn't help because it legitimizes them somewhat and also forces them underground; I'd prefer the mofos are out in the open so they can be hunted down

it's funny how pieces of crap like tucker coopts him to prove a point that he wasn't even trying to make

Swarms of fish flies in Saskatchewan field

Easter Sunday celebrations in Greece get a bit out of hand

man frees wolf spider

Stalked by a Cougar

Payback says...

Fun Fact: This cougar is still hunting rabbits and deer for no other reason than he's 170 miles into an area where people tranquilize and truck him away from populated areas instead of bumpstocking 30 rounds of 5.56×45mm NATO through his falling corpse.



...not that there's anything wrong with that.

The Moiré Effect Lights That Guide Ships Home

Sagemind says...

From YouTube:


Martin Jeffries
2 days ago
Hi Tom, I'm a merchant navy officer who used to work around there, although I never came across this particular light... Sector Lights and Leading lights (parallax) are the internationally recognised marine signals for this sort of use (white light centre, with red and green lights either side to guide you to a safe channel, which i'm sure you've researched and are aware of), but one thing that doesn't come up too often is lines to specifically avoid, and as such there isn't an internationally recognised means of transmitting this with lights. The signal is pointing towards the danger, which is unusual in maritime practice, but it's certainly not a common light and isn't in the IALA buoyage system used for identifying marine hazards.

If it's in a marina, which i think you mentioned, it'll be specifically to stop boats dropping anchor on the submerged cable within the marina's jurisdiction, and it'll be specifically referenced in the marina's or the solent by-laws as an anomalous regulation. (I don't have time to go and hunt it down, but it'll be there as a local reg.) As far as i'm aware, that's the only possible reason for it. It's an unusual solution to an unusual problem. I could of course be wrong...i bring no hard evidence to the table!
Hope it helps

JFK - The Speech That Killed Him

newtboy says...

Da comrade.
Bob, when you can't speak English it becomes impossible to have an adult conversation, and clearly evident you aren't American, but not a bit clear what you're saying.

Individuals break the law on occasion, that does not a secret cabal or deep state conspiracy make. Most of what you complain about is Trump being opposed for ignoring the law and constitution. Consider his administration is on track for the most indictments and most convictions ever, barely in his second year, most of which are tied to treasonous activities against the United States, so I get that you have to believe the entire world is conspiring to destroy his presidency, otherwise you must admit you support the most criminal, least competent president ever. Even Regan's administration averaged under 20 filed indictments per year, you can find that many from multiple single individuals in Trump's administration, I think you can actually find an unprecedented over 20 charges plead guilty to in year one, which kind of destroys the 'witch hunt' conspiracy accusations.

Baselessly accusing the organizations that are investigating him for treason of conspiracy would be laughable if not for people like you who back him up. Because of people like you, it's incredibly harmful to our government, laws, and nation, another indicator you live in Kiev and work for Putin.
I could be wrong about where you live, but I'm not wrong about who your stated views benefit.

bobknight33 said:

Well then would be saying I and JFK of delusional paranoia.
I saying not so. I'm saying some of these organizations are doing their own thing regardless of American laws and Constitution.

The Most Disturbing Painting

rnbriggs says...

Well, this won't let me paste the url, but I googled 'the hunt painting "cabin in the woods"' - follow the results that include a photo of Richard Jenkins on flixist, site has an image link

The Most Disturbing Painting

The Most Disturbing Painting

newtboy says...

The painting of the hunt from the movie Cabin in the Woods, a gory scene of dogs and hunters tearing apart a lamb that covered the two way mirror in the bedrooms.
Google "painting from cabin in the woods movie"....I'm not sure it's actually named.

Seeing it again, it's not as gruesome as I remembered it, but still disturbing.

Edit: also good, the ship in a storm and other dark paintings from 1408

ChaosEngine said:

Thanks for the promote. Do you have a link to the painting? (Googling "The Hunt from Cabin in the Woods" just gives me images of cabins in the woods!)

The Most Disturbing Painting

ChaosEngine says...

Thanks for the promote. Do you have a link to the painting? (Googling "The Hunt from Cabin in the Woods" just gives me images of cabins in the woods!)

newtboy said:

Good and creepy, but I liked The Hunt from Cabin in the Woods better.
For a dining room mural, it's amazing.
*promote

The Most Disturbing Painting

newtboy says...

Good and creepy, but I liked The Hunt from Cabin in the Woods better.
For a dining room mural, this is amazing.
*promote

John Oliver - Arming Teachers

ChaosEngine says...

@MilkmanDan, excellent points all round.

I'm not a gun owner, and I have no interest in buying one for self-defence, but I have fired guns a few times (at shooting ranges or clay pigeon shoots) and it's an undeniably fun activity. I could also see myself going hunting for food at some point.

Jim Jeffries makes an excellent point in his gun control rant.
"fuck off, I like guns" is actually a reasonable argument. If you like something and you're not harming anyone with it, why should it be taken from you? After all, many "anti-gun" (or more accurately "pro-gun control") people will make the same argument FOR drugs. "I'm just smoking some weed/having a beer in my house. I'm not hurting anyone, just leave me alone".

But the thing is unless you're a hardcore libertarian, almost everyone agrees that there should be some sensible limits on drugs. Even for legal drugs like alcohol, we mandate that you must be a certain age (older than you have to be to buy a gun, which is lunacy to me) and that you can't drive drunk, etc.

The sad thing is, there's near universal agreement on this, even in the US. The vast majority of people are in favour of the kind of simple, common-sense regulations you mention.

It's just that the politicians are in the pocket of the NRA. As one of shooting survivors pointed out "We should change the names of AR-15s to “Marco Rubio” because they are so easy to buy", and I cannot say how much I want to stand up and applaud that epic burn.

Liberal Redneck: NRA thinks more guns solve everything

harlequinn says...

Sigh. What a sad day to have to read the likes of you.

I didn't know there was a strict definition. I asked a question and pondered some answers. Oh no! There world is ending. Why do you have to be a continual callow fool about such things? You'll note I didn't jump to google (like others do) to quickly look up a definition (I chose not to). I don't like using google as a false extension of my knowledge like others do. I like to have a good discussion using only the knowledge I have at that instant. But instead we all have to suffer people like you who jump in keyboard blazing "you're wrong on a thing and therefore you're an inferior fucktard who doesn't deserve to be here" instead of going "Actually, there is a strict definition of assault rifle. It's defined as...". Do you see the difference? I hate to be the one to tell you, but you need to learn to control your emotions. As an adult you should have learned this by now. You may believe you are communicating effectively but you are not. You are abrasive and abusive to anyone and everyone on far to regular a basis. You should be ashamed of yourself but I doubt you have the introspection to see your flaws.

The most irritating thing about having to point this out is that, now with strict definition in hand (provided by you), I can point out that instead of you telling Digitalfiend there is a strict definition and that "assault rifles" are already heavily restricted (as you should have pointed out), that I have to point it out to him instead.

And yes, I was already familiar with the studies I quoted previously - I have previously researched the topic of gun control in Australia.

"Why must you feign being so obtuse and naive as a pretext to sesquipedalian and pedantic argument of your own creation?"

Please stop making things up. The second you see what you consider a mistake you jump in with bullshit like this thinking you are going in for the kill. You're laughable and you're making life hard for yourself.

Shotguns aren't rifles? No shit Sherlock. It was an example of where semi-automatic is better. Semi-automatics are better than pump guns. You're dreaming if you think they're even in the same league. Duck hunting is better with a semi-automatic.

The only person who said anything about "Indiscriminately pumping animals, even nuisance animals full of lead" is you. I don't know where you learned to hunt but I learned one shot one kill. And a semi-automatic makes this more efficient (and if you do need a backup shot it comes very quickly). Most pest animals are left to rot. It's too much trouble picking up the carcasses (and often legislated that you must leave them where they drop). If you don't know how to hunt then leave it to the people who do, please (it's so easy to turn your words around).

Trapping, baiting, etc. are others methods that work well in varying circumstances.

Choosing a pump gun over a semi-auto is a beginners mistake. The spread of buckshot or home defense rounds at close quarters is fairly low and you must always aim your firearm properly. In a home defense situation, anyone who is relying on the spread of shotgun pellets to hit their target is a terrible marksman and should consider getting some lessons. You get the same loading sound from a semi-automatic when you let the bolt go forward. I don't know of any data to support the notion that the loading sound scares people away. It has some merit though.

Now, as usual for me I'll be busy for the next 4 months (back at work this morning - I shouldn't even be replying to this but I thought - "hey, I've gotta throw a dog a bone"). I may or may not get to reply to the expected vehemence to come. Have fun howling at the wind. Don't worry, you're views are the immutable truth and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong, and you're insults are totally the best (snigger).

newtboy said:

as·sault ri·fle. : noun-a rapid-fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use.
Obviously it's not any gun used to fight. You act on one hand like you're a near expert, and on the other like you know nothing about the subject. Why must you feign being so obtuse and naive as a pretext to sesquipedalian and pedantic argument of your own creation?

Shotguns aren't rifles, and pump action isn't semi auto. No need for semi auto to hunt ducks.

Indiscriminately pumping animals, even nuisance animals full of lead isn't acceptable, even when you're just eradicating them and intentionally wasting the meat. That's why professionals trap them for humane disposal. You get more that way too. If you can't hunt humanely, leave it to those who can, please.

Home defense, I think short barrel pump action shotguns are the best choice...easier to wield in close quarters, and much easier to hit your target with. Also, the unmistakable sound of chambering a round is usually all it takes.

Liberal Redneck: NRA thinks more guns solve everything

newtboy says...

as·sault ri·fle. : noun-a rapid-fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use.
Obviously it's not any gun used to fight. You act on one hand like you're a near expert, and on the other like you know nothing about the subject. Why must you feign being so obtuse and naive as a pretext to sesquipedalian and pedantic argument of your own creation?

Shotguns aren't rifles, and pump action isn't semi auto. No need for semi auto to hunt ducks.

Indiscriminately pumping animals, even nuisance animals full of lead isn't acceptable, even when you're just eradicating them and intentionally wasting the meat. That's why professionals trap them for humane disposal. You get more that way too. If you can't hunt humanely, leave it to those who can, please.

Home defense, I think short barrel pump action shotguns are the best choice...easier to wield in close quarters, and much easier to hit your target with. Also, the unmistakable sound of chambering a round is usually all it takes.

harlequinn said:

This brings up some interesting points.

What is an "assault rifle"?
.
.

You may not need a semi-auto for deer hunting, but hunting doesn't end with one animal. Going duck hunting - it's much easier with a semi-auto and 6 round versus a 2 round break action. Going on a pig hunt (for animal destruction). You'll want a semi-auto with a high capacity magazine.
.
.
What about home defense?



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon