>> ^colt45:

So those 82% are all owning guns for murder or war, then? Let's just take this absurd myopic view one step further: Rocks are dangerous weapons that need to be banned! They are readily available to children and highly dangerous!
>> ^L0cky:
Around 6% of US Americans hunt, yet around 34% own a gun; therefore around 82% of gun owners own a gun for something other than hunting. Bringing up hunting is just avoiding the issue.
Besides, I don't think that guy's UZI is for hunting rabbits.
Also, you don't need to teach children how to safely use firearms if they don't have access to firearms. Kinda like how you don't need to teach them how to safely use a particle accelerator, even though they too are dangerous.


Wow. That definitely made my top 10 list of "Really stupid things that I actually read on the internet".

Seriously, when was the last time a kid accidently threw a rock and blew his friends brains out? Accidently put a hole through their own foot / hand / leg?

Sure, they can be used as a close up blunt damage weapon. However, in order to actually kill someone with a rock, it would generally have to be pre-meditated (i.e. kill them when they're asleep, because if you try to kill someone with a rock when they're concious and healthy, it probably wont go well.)

I can think of countless stories over the years involving some idiot irrational gun owner going out and killing someone they knew nothing about, because they felt threatened. Lately, the one I remember is of Trayvon Martin. You know, the kid shot for eating skittles on a street he didn't live on.

But let's go ahead and get back to the point @spoco2 was making earlier. Rocks have existed since the beginning of time. They serve no purpose, they have no design, or goal. They're simply there.

Guns, on the other hand, were designed as an instrument of death. In no part of the gun design was someone thinking "AND it'll function as a paperweight!". It was just another step further in the direction of long ranged combat, specifically for ending the life of another human being.

That's not to say that everybody who does own a gun has it for the sole reason of killing someone, after all, people still collect swords, axes, fascinating weapons from throughout the ages.

But I can't honestly see the amount of collectors being too high.

>> ^Barseps:

@spoco2 .... Sorry bud, I have to disagree with you there. Potential international enemies will think TWICE before invading America because they are the most heavily armed civilian population on Earth. Guns may not be a good thing, but looking at it from from that angle, they're a bloody necessary evil.
Climbs off soapbox.
>> ^spoco2:
Guns have no upside.
At all.



Really? Let's let your hypothetical scenario play out.

Some other massive country with huge resources (let's say it rhymes with vagina) decides to invade the U.S.
Fuck knows why, given that they could simply buy you and be done with it. But for the sake of argument, lets assume that dfinitely not china whoever manages to overwhelm over 1 million of the best equipped, highly trained military in the history of the world on their home turf. Do you really think a bunch of amateur paranoid nutjobs are gonna stop them?

@spoco2 .... Sorry bud, I have to disagree with you there. Potential international enemies will think TWICE before invading America because they are the most heavily armed civilian population on Earth. Guns may not be a good thing, but looking at it from from that angle, they're a bloody necessary evil.

*Climbs off soapbox.

>> ^spoco2:

Guns have no upside.
At all.

>> ^bareboards2:

One word.
Kids.
This guy is an idiot to have his guns unsecured.
@radx just sent me a link -- http://www.technologyreview.com/
news/506466/given-tablets-but-no-teachers-ethiopian-children-teach-themselves/
This thing would not stop a kid.


Who said he had kids? WTF is wrong with you people? He likes guns. He probably enjoys collecting guns, (one of the points @deathcow was making that, apparently, flew right over several of your heads). Maybe he even enjoys shooting them. So what? You don't like guns? Fine. Don't buy them. JFC, so many paranoid leaps of logic here.

@spoco2
Guns can kill when people USE them to kill. It's a childish argument to claim that all guns are inherently dangerous. The vast, VAST majority of gun owners are responsible gun owners. Unless you're claiming this guy is a killer, or, as @L0cky lamely implied, wants to use them to justify the money he spent. Maybe he's a terrorist! There are about 350 million guns in this country and about 250 million vehicles, yet the number of fatalities for each is about the same each year (and over half of the gun fatalities are suicides). Why are you so worried about guns? I won't even mention alcohol, electricity, bathtubs, McDonald's, and icy sidewalks. Just because something isn't "designed to kill people" doesn't mean it isn't "inherently dangerous". Hunting rifles aren't "designed to kill people". Are they safe for kids? And what is the deal with using a red herring like kids? Using kids playing with loaded guns as the nails in your soapbox is almost as silly as decrying automobiles because they are dangerous for kids to play in with the engine running. And, again, WHO SAID HE HAD KIDS?

I don't own guns. I don't like to shoot guns. They don't do anything for me, although I would consider getting one some day if SHTF began to seem inevitable. I'm definitely not a fan of guns, but some of you people are just ridiculous.

>> ^spoco2:

@Sagemind Oh I'm so with you there. It's a pathetic way to get views, it shits me.
Why they can't just live on their own humour without pretending to be 'banned' is beyond me.


I think that's a bit of a stretch. I reckon they just wanted to brand these parody videos, so they called it "banned". Stupid name, still funny.

>> ^spoco2:

Does no one else find it a little sad that people find smoking weed so central to their lives that they feel compelled to cheer on people doing it in movies?
Surely once it gets to the point where one of the things you identify yourself as is a smoker of weed, you are letting it take up too much of your life?
Do people who drink really watching someone else on screen drink and go 'Fuck yeah man, he's drinking! I drink too! Fuck yeah, I LOVE him!'


I agree with the guy below you in that it has to do with the legality and the social perception of it. Look at any group that partakes in something that straddles the line of socially acceptable or legal and you'll find a group that feels a kinship toward each other. Particularly so if the person identifies themself as such outwardly.

I'd imagine people that say "yeah man smoke it up famous people" are people who willingly identify themselves as regular smokers or "pot heads" or "stoners." For such people this is popular culture and iconic scenes saying "yo man smoking is fine or fun or at least not some horribly illegal activity" to which they say "hell yeah I agree!"

Also for me I like the fact that it brings into question the perception that many people who are more radically against it hold. For many weed is just a lighter drug thats a step or two further than alcohol but for many it's a social cancer and the beginnings of harder crimes and drugs.

For me the common use of it in popular culture and on shows that tend to be on FX, Showtime, HBO, etc. just goes to show it for what it is...a fairly benign form of intoxication that is as close to large scale acceptability as anything besides alcohol has been. It shows it's not that different from people whom get intoxicated from alcohol on a semi-common basis. I would argue that many of my professional friends and colleagues have just as damaging results from their social drinking as I do from smoking and I'd be the first to say that my personal use is greater than theirs.

As a stoner, I'd be surprised to see these same attitudes and emotions surrounding it's use persist if it was legalized or decriminalized as that would take away the social aspect of "we chose to dismiss the law/society and partake in this activity we both enjoy" but it would take many years if not a generation or two for the old ideas to fall off.

>> ^spoco2:

Does no one else find it a little sad that people find smoking weed so central to their lives that they feel compelled to cheer on people doing it in movies?
Surely once it gets to the point where one of the things you identify yourself as is a smoker of weed, you are letting it take up too much of your life?
Do people who drink really watching someone else on screen drink and go 'Fuck yeah man, he's drinking! I drink too! Fuck yeah, I LOVE him!'


I'd imagine it has something to do with the legal status of weed in most countries. People feel a kinship with other people who are "oppressed by the man".

Weed would probably be less cool if it was legalised.

>> ^spoco2:

promote this because I never knew these were guys in suits (obviously not all the shots). I love the using the right techniques for the right shots mentality of Jurassic Park.
Absolutely one of my favourite escapist films and just stunning CGI that still holds up today.
Do it right and it lasts forever


Ditto. It's amazing!

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued - promote requested by spoco2.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by spoco2.

>> ^spoco2:

Gimme gimme gimme.
Bioshock is still my favourite gaming experience. I am just now playing Bioshock 2.
This may be my reason to finally upgrade my 5 year old pc. It's been able to continue to play the few games I throw at it, but this might finally break it!


Actually you'd be surprised, they are still designing this for the same console that ran Bioshock 1 so they can't exactly push the polygons or textures any more than they did on the first game.

>> ^Mikus_Aurelius:

Going along with students' jokes is a double edged sword. It's nice to have students who like you and cheer for you. Sometimes that "respect" comes at the expense of the kind of respect that makes them do their work in your class or obey your instructions in an emergency. There doesn't always have to be a tradeoff, but I've also never seen a correlation between the two.
>> ^spoco2:
And that's how you earn students' respect.


But a good teacher doesn't "make" the students do their work...a good teacher inspires students to investigate by their own choice.

Going along with students' jokes is a double edged sword. It's nice to have students who like you and cheer for you. Sometimes that "respect" comes at the expense of the kind of respect that makes them do their work in your class or obey your instructions in an emergency. There doesn't always have to be a tradeoff, but I've also never seen a correlation between the two.

>> ^spoco2:

And that's how you earn students' respect.

@spoco2

I'm in no way arguing --nor is anybody else, that I see-- that this is a good model moving forward for dealing with bad guys. My question was whether this particular video should be sifted. I wanted to sift it for its topicality, its newsworthiness, and the fodder for discussion it would provide. At the same time, I could see people objecting to its presence on the site since it's also a call for flash mob vigilante justice from a group not selected by the public.

>> ^spoco2:

Huh, who'd have thunk Katy Perry would be involved in something that'd make me feel anything but revulsion.
Something new every day.


We should elect her as President...probably just as good as those other guys.