A 6 foot backwards heave-on-a-prayer that bounces around isn't spectacular, coming from a 7'6" injury-prone big man with limited mobility and questionable defense.

Allen Iverson has made a career out of such shots, and he's only 6'1".

it's a crazy big man with four arms and two heads!

So my friend GourmetEmu gets roasted so I thought I'd throw in my two cents.

As a worldly apathetic young man in body/ child in mind, it is no doubt the Mr. Emu took to the internet. Where else could he find out if people agree with his opinions on cartoons, obscure movies, and other bits of randomness. When he lived in Chicago he used to have the ever popular Wednesday night bar shift to do this (although I argue that anyone agrees with the guy pooring drinks, no matter how not out of middle school he looks), but ever since he decided to be a big man and take a job out in L.A. the rest of us are poorer for it. Frankly I'm proud of him though, I haven't seen him mention that he worked on Batman once, so I'll do it for him. Any excuse to be an insufferable ass. Right buddy?

Don't ever visit. :-D

>> ^Shepppard:
Oh, and just a P.S. don't bother quoting me and trying to make yourself seem like a big man. This post is long enough as it is without it being picked apart, also: I don't care about what you have to say in response.


There needs to be a name for this tactic, like there is for Godwin's law. If you compare something to Nazis, you automatically lose the debate. Similarly, if you make a huge rambling post and then finish it off by saying "don't bother replying because I don't care to read your response", you automatically lose. This is the interweb version of taking your ball and going home. You have just admitted you can't win, even if you are actually in the right.

Let's call it Wilder's Internet Debate Corollary Number 7, just for the sake of brevity.

>> ^imstellar28:
>> ^Payback:
Wow, this thread sure has people putting their heads up their asses. Jeez, this is a video rating site, not Capitol Hill...

Its a controversial video, in a political channel--what do you expect? If you're anti-intellectual, stick to the big boobs, nut shots, and fluffy bunny videos.


I'm sorry, do you have something to prove here?

From what i've read about your comments, you take things out of context and try to make some form of rebuttal against them.


"You clearly have no understand of the meaning of excessive force. Excessive force is judged, and is applied to the current situation only! It has nothing to do with past actions--it has to do with the current state of the arrestee. No matter how belligerent/criminal they were acting prior, if they are currently passive and cooperating you cannot apply force based on previous actions."

This seems to be a cover-up for the fact that you said that cops aren't allowed to do anything to someone who has been shooting cops.

"She could have shot 10 cops right before this, and they still could not have used that much force to arrest her."

Of which, two things. First, you only furthered their point about "But that doesn't mean that it would be excessive in every situation."

See, what I draw from that is, That much force can be used in certain situations and not be called Excessive, and that seems to be what you're trying to lecture them about.

And the second thing, If you think cops aren't allowed to use lethal force to subdue a target that's been shooting at officers, no matter how innocent they were in the first place, THEY JUST FUCKING SHOT 10 COPS. Lets even take cops out of the picture and replace it. THEY JUST FUCKING SHOT 10 PEOPLE.

There.

>> ^imstellar28:
>> ^anyprophet:
These types of videos always bring out the crazies who think we live in some kind of police state.

What is that, a joke? Rights don't mean anything unless you have them when you need them and in every single case in recent memory when someone actually needed them, they were violated. How is that not a police state?
Examples:
Confiscation of firearms during Katrina
Japanese sent to internment camps after pearl harbor
The American citizen who was sent to Guantanamo bay for several years.
Inability to protest in public (freedom cages)
Un-prosecuted Police Brutality



Ooo, a fun one now. Lets start with.. Oh, The guns, during Katrina. Now, you can keep in mind I'm canadian, and maybe we somehow think differently about these things up here.. But during a state of mass panic of the people, where mass disaster is happening, looting, all that fun stuff, I don't think it's a smart idea to have any form of firearm. All that's going to cause is more potential panic and destruction.

Japanese sent to internment camps? wow, we're really digging here aren't we. You are right for that point, their right to freedom was compromised, but that somehow doesn't fall under the category of "Recent Memory" to me. That more falls under the.. "There was a war going on at the time" category of things where lots of bad shit happened.

>> ^imstellar28:
>> ^Aemaeth:
>> ^charliem:
Its legal to defend yourself against a cop...hell you can kill a cop if they are arresting you and you are innocent.
Happened a few years back, guy got off any charges at all.

Wait, what? You can't be serious. What country is that in?
"I knew I hadn't been speeding, but he kept writing that ticket anyway, so I shot him."

Jesus you're ignorant. What is the difference between a cop and a criminal who approaches you, while you are minding your own business and not breaking any laws, and tries to utilize lethal force against you? Nothing! Unless the cops badge number is 007, he doesn't have a license to kill. If your life is in danger--from cop or criminal--you have a legal right to defend yourself. What country are you living in?


ohh... an attempt at a joke! It really wasn't funny.
Why don't we backtrack here to show the point they were making originally, but YOU were too ignorant to see it.

"She could have shot 10 cops right before this, and they still could not have used that much force to arrest her."

The main quote, by the way, really doesn't have anything backing it up, So far it's just someone saying "I heard once that..." which really has nothing to it. For all WE know, that's exactly what happened.

Other then that, their quote was a joke. That happens on the sift. a lot. They're usually funny... usually.

>> ^imstellar28:
If someone initiates lethal force on you, irregardless of the circumstances, you have the right to defend yourself with lethal force as well....
How hard is it to make a simple argument around here without a bunch of random, irrelevant crap spewed in response?
Yes gwiz665, I understand you would go to trial after killing someone. Yes I also understand shooting a cop who simply arrests you is not a valid self defense argument. Why are you even making these points?
And for the 10th time, SDGundamX, what would be the point of finding out what she said beforehand--are you just curious or something? Because it has no bearing on the argument of excessive force.


Who the fuck are you to stifle curiosity? For all we know she threatened the cop, she could have punched him in the face, she could have been weilding a tazer that miraculously got knocked out of her hands by a big boobed woman carrying a fluffy bunny, and then went on to hit some guy in the nuts. The cop, then seeing his opportunity finally struck back at the woman and saved his life and then went on to cure cancer.

We don't know every single detail of the circumstances surrounding the lethal force. You've taken up an "Innocent until proven guilty" stance, where as the rest of us are actually being optimistic.

Whatever your issue is, being it getting off by trying to correct people over teh interwebs, or thinking you're somehow superior to the rest of the sifters because YOU KNOW HOW TO USE BOLD! just save the asshole routine, and watch the video.

Oh, and just a P.S. don't bother quoting me and trying to make yourself seem like a big man. This post is long enough as it is without it being picked apart, also: I don't care about what you have to say in response.

And now, I'm going to go get some pie.

Bravo, MH. One of the best/funniest articles I ever read about Andre the Giant was actually from Modern Drunkard Magazine:

http://www.drunkard.com/issues/10_06/10_06_andre_giant.html

"For proof of his drawing power, look no further than Wrestlemania III in 1987. The main event was Andre vs. Hulk Hogan. The show drew the first million-dollar gate in wrestling history, set a pay-per-view record that lasted a decade, and set the all-time indoor attendance record for any live event ever—78,000+ butts in seats at the Pontiac Silver Dome in Detroit—destroying the previous record set by some rock band called the Rolling Stones. His rematch with Hogan two months later, broadcast live on NBC, attracted 33 million viewers, making it the most watched wrestling match ever."

And another comment from the article...

"You won’t find it in the Guinness Book of World Records, but Andre the Giant holds the world record for the largest number of beers consumed in a single sitting. These were standard 12-ounce bottles of beer, nothing fancy, but during a six-hour period Andre drank 119 of them. It was one of the few times Andre got drunk enough to pass out, which he did in a hallway at his hotel. His companions, quite drunk themselves, couldn’t move the big man. Fearing trouble with cops, they stole a piano cover from the lounge and draped it over Andre’s inert form. He slept peacefully until morning, unmolested by anyone. Perhaps the hotel people thought he was a piece of furniture."

upvote for big man confidence.

*philosophy
Quite short talk for a big man as Herzog

It takes a big man to make a public apology like this, and an even bigger man to pull that 'big man' platitudinous crap out every time a big man does a big-man thing. So you're all welcome.
__________________________

Seriously, it's very gracious of you to do this, choggie. I'm pretty sure I know to whom this is directed, but that's beside the point. It's cool that you're willing to stand down to avoid an all-out hater-fest, which is so prevalent in the comments sections of all the major video sites. I hope VideoSift never gets plagued with that kind of shit. I salute you.

The only people who criticise Dawkins are those who do not understand what he is saying, and they only ever respond with ad hominem arguments, again because they don't understand what he is saying.

He put the question to rest utterly, if you don't understand the answer, go back to the big man in the sky and see if he can do any better.

If you find him arrogant, GOOD, it's about time the ignorance and arrogance of religion was met with arrogance based in rationality, common sense and truth.

it was scripted for the big man to pose not for the host aswell

Well done Big Man! The avatar still makes me smile after all this time...which really hasn't been that long.

bellman = big man on campus!

*standing ovation invocation on location

nice one big man. congrats on the big twinklin pink carbon thingy

Peas and Rice
al

Stay away from my candy, big man!