This is so derivative. How did they pitch this?
"Okay, it's Rooster Cogburn meets Agent J... except that instead of Will Smith we got that white dude from Green Lantern. And Jeff Bridges gets to keep both eyeballs.
Also they fight dead people instead.
Plus we can totally re-use that MIB Headquarters set to keep costs down."

And, yes, I'll probably go see it, just for Jeff Bridges.

Does this work on dead peoples fat rolls? In the zombie apocalypse those will be far more accessible than Crisco.

You don't need high speed internet either, technically (I do, but I am a robot). Technically, you don't need a lot of things, it is all pretty much arbitrary when you talk in those terms. When you make people have to sign up for certain rights via some sort of process, it is the beginning of a real erosion of rights. I'll even meet people half way to say if you want to be in public areas with a gun, some kind of permit is needed like cars...I don't like it, but Ill give you that. But as long as I am not using it to commit crimes, your right to restrict my behavior is over...period. It might be that freedom comes with a hefty prices of dead people, innocent people, innocent people that we could of protected with ever increasing restrictions of social liberties. I mean, look at Saudi Arabia, lower murder rates than even some European countries of pretty good order. But they live in a totalitarian dictatorship, and I am not trying to make a scarecrow argument about totalitarian dictatorships and whatnot, what I am trying to say is people dying isn't the only important metric when talking about rights to do things.


It might be true that more people will die with lacks gun laws, it might be true that more people die because of lacks drug lacks, lots of things might be true about how freedom serves to make economics weak, countries less secure, more prone to internal strife and faction, it might be true that the seeds of freedom and the ability to self regulate cause harms that extend beyond ones self. Even so, I still don't think a better framework exists for conducting ourselves that doesn't cripple and stifle people who have done no wrong. If the price for a drunk driver is abolition, the price of a murder disarmament, the price of wreck less driving horse drawn carriage, then we have failed to address the underlying problem and snub out freedoms ability to creatively deal with complex social challenges via the creative process of problem solving.

I think history has shown that any attempts to snub out action instead of guide it fail miserably. Gun control starts and ends with people, not laws, I suggest we start there. Starting neighborhood gun responsibility programs, safety education for youths, ect...whatever, I don't know, I can't pretend to know what is the best way to address the complex issue of gun control for every community, the point is that is their bag, it can be done without force given the context of the USA. Not every country has that luxury, children roaming the streets with AK-47s is not a real problem in this country, nor would it be if gun control laws were more lacks. We do have problems, I don't want there to be any mistake about that, but I don't think the solution is wholesale elimination of thing that only CAN be dangerous, I mean, anything can be dangerous, ask the folks in Oklahoma about ammonia nitrate...you don't even need a licence to buy that stuff.

Point is, the world is dangerous, and I think freedom allows for a certain amount of that danger to exist. It is the price we pay. We should look to the unwritten code that manages us, the code of culture and community.

"The freedom which we enjoy in our government extends also to our ordinary life. There, far from exercising a jealous surveillance over each other, we do not feel called upon to be angry with our neighbour for doing what he likes, or even to indulge in those injurious looks which cannot fail to be offensive, although they inflict no positive penalty. But all this ease in our private relations does not make us lawless as citizens. Against this fear is our chief safeguard, teaching us to obey the magistrates and the laws, particularly such as regard the protection of the injured, whether they are actually on the statute book, or belong to that code which, although unwritten, yet cannot be broken without acknowledged disgrace."

Pericles' Funeral Oration from the Peloponnesian War

If the data from the two countries does indeed correlate, here's what I take from the data. Firstly, you're more likely to be in a violent situation in the uk. However, if you find yourself in a violent situation in the states it's far more likely to be deadly.

People in the uk don't routinely carry around weapons. If someone knocks your pint out of your hand in a pub he's very very unlikely to be carrying a gun so he's a lot more likely to get a slap. I would imagine a lot of this 'petty' violence is less prevalent where the person you slap could pull out a gun and shoot you. If the two sets of data are comparable this is where the difference comes from.

So there's the trade off. Personally I'd rather get fifty slaps than be shot once. When teenagers go out in the uk the parents worry that they'll come back with a black eye, not that they'll be back in a body bag...

Defending 11k dead people yearly by comparing it to accidental deaths is retarded to the core. Yeah, compare murder rates to third world countries...that'll help.

And conservatives are incapable of recognizing that that's a delusional fantasy completely unmoored from the reality we actually inhabit.

Lax gun regulation just leads to more dead people, not to some utopia where only people who deserve death wind up shot.

>> ^VoodooV:
WTF? Did Obama visit Yogi and do a Sandusky on him or something? Talk about taking it personal.
I agree both parties are shitty, but it's demonstrable that one is worse than the other. Yeah, I'm not exactly a fan of drone strikes and dead civillians. But you honestly think the other guy is any better? Or hey, you want to go back to Bush the lesser and not only have a bunch of dead civillians, but have a bunch of dead Americans too because of wars of deception? Romney's beating the war drums for Iran. Yeah...SO MUCH BETTER!! lets have MORE dead people wooo!! I'm sorry, but cherry picking drone strikes is pretty bad tunnel vision, when in reality, it's actually drastically reduced the death toll because they are strikes instead of another occupation where even more people would be killed.
I'm sorry, but we are never going to live in a world where our politicians are squeaky clean. Even in a utopia, our politicians are going to have to, by necessity, do shitty things. In the real world, people have to get their hands dirty.
It's great that you're idealistic, really, I applaud it. But here in the real world, we really do have to choose between the lesser of two evils. Take your pick or stfu.
Edit: sorry, I always mix up Kofi and Yogi for some reason.


Here's the thing, I can't even argue this with you because you don't know fucking anything.

1. We're not going to War with Iran...never will we go to war with Iran. They don't meet the fundamental requirement for being a helpless nation. We might bomb their nuclear facilities but that won't do shit.

2. Both parties aren't shitty they're different wings of the SAME PARTY.

3. Cherry picking Drones strikes isn't about tunnel vision it's a War Crime. It's also destabilizing Pakistan, which has Nukes and people in it who are a serious threat. That might actually happen, Iran never will.

4. It's got nothing to do with me being Idealistic (I'm far from it) it's got everything to do with me taking it upon myself to become educated in this shit. I KNOW MORE BECAUSE I WORK FOR IT.

5. I'm not gonna pick the lesser of Two Evils again. I did it once for Obama when it was a serious historical event, something that hopefully would've moved us forward. I'm not in a state that matters so I'm not gonna vote for him again.

6. He's Black.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^VoodooV:
>> ^Yogi:
I love Joss Whedon. Everything he's done I worship at the guys feet. Stay outa politics Whedon so I don't have to hate you.

Sorry, Repubs made it personal so you have to fight back.
This "wah! they're equally bad" nonsense is just that.

I'm sorry but what the fuck are you talking about? How did repubs call out Joss Whedon? I'm saying he should leave it be, I don't want him in politics because I'm a fan of his. I don't like hearing people who don't know shit about fuck telling me what I should do.
I voted for Obama once, he sounded like a good choice, also it was a historical event I wanted to be a part of. I knew he wouldn't do much, I didn't know he would go around assassinating children and trying his best to make sure Pakistan breaks up and hands out it's nukes like candy. Or that there would be NO CHANGE in how Israel does business, Gaza is still the worlds largest prison, Israel is completely immune to international law.
Sorry Mother Fucker, I voted for him once he ain't getting my vote again. And I want Whedon to shut up about this because I like him, and I can't stand to see the man who made Firefly support a War Criminal.


WTF? Did Obama visit Yogi and do a Sandusky on him or something? Talk about taking it personal.

I agree both parties are shitty, but it's demonstrable that one is worse than the other. Yeah, I'm not exactly a fan of drone strikes and dead civillians. But you honestly think the other guy is any better? Or hey, you want to go back to Bush the lesser and not only have a bunch of dead civillians, but have a bunch of dead Americans too because of wars of deception? Romney's beating the war drums for Iran. Yeah...SO MUCH BETTER!! lets have MORE dead people wooo!! I'm sorry, but cherry picking drone strikes is pretty bad tunnel vision, when in reality, it's actually drastically reduced the death toll because they are strikes instead of another occupation where even more people would be killed.

I'm sorry, but we are never going to live in a world where our politicians are squeaky clean. Even in a utopia, our politicians are going to have to, by necessity, do shitty things. In the real world, people have to get their hands dirty.

It's great that you're idealistic, really, I applaud it. But here in the real world, we really do have to choose between the lesser of two evils. Take your pick or stfu.

Edit: sorry, I always mix up Kofi and Yogi for some reason.

>> ^chingalera:

This guy's head shape scares me.


You know how the Mormons have their genealogy and dead-people-baptism projects? It's really a breeding program to create the perfect candidate.

He's got the hair. He's got the chin. He's got the money.

He IS the kwisatz haderach presidential candidate!

>> ^quantumushroom:

This laser-like focus on election fraud should be centered on Illinois, where it turns out some of the dead people voting three times or more aren't even American citizens!


Strange...I've heard voting fraud hasn't been much of a problem and that's what makes this attempt to stop it so ridiculous. You have any proof saying otherwise?

>> ^quantumushroom:

And HOW! Chicagoan dead people who vote three times are more are still bitter about not being alive to get their free Obamaphones, but they won't be voting for that damned Romney, 'specailly now that Obama has promised free health care extending to beyond-the-grave.
>> ^Payback:
>> ^BoneRemake:
I for one will not be voting for this smug lipsmacker.

QM says we can vote for Obama in Illinois, though.



Dude. Can I have an Obamaphone? My smartphone is garbage.

Since we're all in such serious fact-mode, tell me, how is Obamacare's new heavy tax burden on the middle class going to help the middle class?

There's three trillion dollars in the hands of the people--also known as capital--waiting out this 4-year nightmare. The lack of job creation and investment indicate the people do not trust this administration. Nor should they.


>> ^KnivesOut:

I like how you keep trotting out this "Obamaphone" bullshit like its something new. The Lifeline program has existed since Reagan (1984).>> ^quantumushroom:
And HOW! Chicagoan dead people who vote three times are more are still bitter about not being alive to get their free Obamaphones, but they won't be voting for that damned Romney, 'specailly now that Obama has promised free health care extending to beyond-the-grave.
>> ^Payback:
>> ^BoneRemake:
I for one will not be voting for this smug lipsmacker.

QM says we can vote for Obama in Illinois, though.

I like how you keep trotting out this "Obamaphone" bullshit like its something new. The Lifeline program has existed since Reagan (1984).>> ^quantumushroom:

And HOW! Chicagoan dead people who vote three times are more are still bitter about not being alive to get their free Obamaphones, but they won't be voting for that damned Romney, 'specailly now that Obama has promised free health care extending to beyond-the-grave.
>> ^Payback:
>> ^BoneRemake:
I for one will not be voting for this smug lipsmacker.

QM says we can vote for Obama in Illinois, though.

And HOW! Chicagoan dead people who vote three times are more are still bitter about not being alive to get their free Obamaphones, but they won't be voting for that damned Romney, 'specailly now that Obama has promised free health care extending to beyond-the-grave.

>> ^Payback:

>> ^BoneRemake:
I for one will not be voting for this smug lipsmacker.

QM says we can vote for Obama in Illinois, though.

>> ^quantumushroom:

This laser-like focus on election fraud should be centered on Illinois, where it turns out some of the dead people voting three times or more aren't even American citizens!


obviously, you can cite some sources. If not, then you're just trolling.