Fail Quotes

[nilecroc]

[yt]mVuspKSjfgA[/yt]

Matthew East said.

I responded with

He then response with
. 

Oh my god this guy is using the same reason that bush invaded Iraq for the Australian intervention in East Timor. I swear these people are some of the biggest hypocrites around.

Is this the same country that censors everything that offends it's dear leaders and has bullshit hate speech laws? But I feel better that their murder rate is slightly lower than the U.S. As long as the chances that some random guy can't shoot me i 1/1000 instead of 1/999, I feel better about myself. I know I can't get an uncesored version of Saints Row 4, but hey, My benevolent leaders have protected me with slightly lower gun murder rates.

[R.E.H.W.R.]

People who complain about commercialism during Christmas.

Ya, I've started to tell people to shut the fuck up about it.

Then, I get, "well look how bad Black Friday is!" Too which I respond with this.
http://blackfridaydeathcount.com/

[Travis Retriever]

"I notice all the people who support abortion are already born." -Ronald Reagan

El Responso: "So are the ones who are against it.   And who don't care.  What's your point?  We're the only sentient/rational beings that we know of so of course we are!  Yet war and the resulting innocents dying is okay with you.  Double standards much?"

Seriously, Reagan blows ass.  Never understood what people saw in his statist hide.

Found the quote from some pillock commenting on one of Hawkeye's journals:  http://comments.deviantart.com/1/382518716/3270162758
"Why? Are you so surprised I can be pro-life without being religious? But I also am tired of repeating myself, because I have been doing that just as well, so I guess we'll just end it the same way most people end debates, where nothing is resolved and no one's opinions are affected."
>>Pro-life without being religious
Yeah.  Sorry.  I don't buy that anymore than I buy that "libertarians are trolls" pillock was a libertarian or Kirk Cameron being an former atheist.
Awww.  He thinks he's people. X3  Not Hawkeye's fault you can't separate your feelings/opinions from facts.  Get over yourself, fucktard.

And the idiot after him calling the walnut bit Hawkeye made "misanthropic" isn't much better.  How is that misanthropic in the slightest?  It's called an analogy people!  Look it up!

[Skm1091]

[yt]mVuspKSjfgA[/yt]

*rolls eyes*

ratofvengence say

Lol, you can't even quote the years of the study? The Attorney General said that in the 13 years from 2000, mass shootings have tripled. Prove it wrong with details if you actually can.
New Zealand, as several people have pointed out but you ignore, has gun control. Not as much as us, but far more than the US. It is also a far more rural nation. No, your attempts there fail too.
You keep throwing this red herring about arson, it just shows how little you actually have to argue with. Gun control saves lives. As a result of gun control, we haven't had a shooting massacre in 17 years, halting a trend. Funnily enough, gun control doesn't stop arson. Did you think it should? Lol.
The diminishing returns was on OUR side you twit. We never let our crime get as horrible as yours, so there wasn't as much room for the homicide rate to drop further. Perhaps you should look it up?
Those places in the US that have piss-poor gun control (at least do it properly!) have it BECAUSE of gun crime, not the other way around. Sheesh...
Seriously, you are going to have to try far harder than that, and perhaps stop using the NRA website as your only source of 'facts'.

[Travis Retriever]

Okay after actually reading all of the article from this post: https://www.bogosity.tv/forum/index.php?topic=291.msg21441#msg21441 http://v.i4031.net/LawIsAnExcuseToDoHarm

I did see a MAJOR fail:  Sorry, OP, but eye for an eye really does leave the world blind.  I don't know what he's talking about the state doesn't try to do equal harm to the perpetrator as retribution (and implying this is a good idea via the last paragraph).  What does he think jail, fines and the fucking death penalty are for?

[tnu]

http://gtx0.com/view.php?post=82733


Just about everybody in this thred say ssomething worth noting here. Pick your favorites.

[Travis Retriever]

Remember that thread I made regarding JBC a while back?  Neither do I.
I do remember his main "source" was this guy:  http://www.youstupidrelativist.com/
A sample:  "Mission statement: To utterly destroy the idiotic religions known as General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, String Theory, and the Electric Universe."

I'd nominate this guy as Idiot of the Year if he was, you know, more relevant.

[R.E.H.W.R.]

Is anyone else sick of this bullshit?!?

[Skm1091]

Is anyone else sick of this bullshit?!?

Since the political system doesn't have the right incentives it's pointless.

[Travis Retriever]

blamethe1st.deviantart.com/journal/Top-11-Most-Disturbing-MLP-FiM-Fandoms-5-308577492

Of particular note:  "And I don't even know what's worse: the art where they're depicted as human, or the art where they're depicted as ponies. Either way, it's still pedophilia—or rather, pedofillya!"  Um, no.  Pedophilia is the act of having sex with pre-pubescents.  It is NOT simply beating off to the idea of the act.

"This is the type of art that should get MegaSweet a visit from Chris Hansen, not thousands of fans."
Hello, I'm Chris Hanson, and I'm here to ruin your life over a victimless crime.

"And for any Megasweet fanboys out there, please spare me the "but they're just fictional characters" defense."
Fucking thought/victimless crimes, y'all!

"Fictional or not, an underaged minor is still an underaged minor, and pornography featuring them is still child pornography, which, last time I checked, is illegal."
So are drugs, yet I don't see you having any moral issue with them, cherry picker.  Also, last I checked, child pornography, by definition, involve real children--not drawings.

"(And while we're on the subject, so is bestiality!)" *points to above bit about drugs being illegal*  Sorry, but the state is not the ultimate arbiter of morality, pal.  So tell me how beliveing it does makes you a libertarian, much less an anarcho-capitalist again?

But wait, there's more!

"If you get your rocks hard over cartoon ponies, fine! That's your fetish. I'm not here to judge you for it."

"But when you start drooling over underage filly flank, please keep it between yourself and your psychiatrist!"
Um, contradiction, much?

"By all means spare the internet! And spare those poor little fillies!"
Welcome to the internet!  A word of advice, avoid sites like:  Inkbunny, furaffinity, and heaven forbid, 4chan, like the plague.  You're the one whose very username is a play on the 1st Amendment.  As you yourself have said, "Don't blame me! Blame the 1st (Amendment)!" when people don't like your opinions.

"How disturbing is it? As disturbing as seeing your next door neigbor on How To Catch A Predator."
Well, considering the amount of fraud on that show, with a 24 year old and a 14 year old--something that only a uber 'moralistic' 20th century seems to have a problem with, there were also cases of them altering the chat logs where the person chatting claimed to be of legal age, and said she wanted to Role Play as someone younger to make it look like he was into younger folk.  So yeah, not as disturbing as you make it out to be.  Grow a thicker skin, pal!
I find it fascinating that destroying someone's life on what are often false pretenses to begin with doesn't have you saying they should be sued for defamation of character.

"Yeah. The problem is how it's implemented. If it wasn't targeting kids who are only one or two years apart, I wouldn't have that much of a problem."
>>The problem is how it's implemented.
*facepalms*  Because we haven't heard THAT excuse enough times from desperate statists!

And it's a bit ironic that he, as a Christian seems to despise these things, given the Bible's stance on the issues (something about selling young children into slavery being awesome, applause of full on child rape, smashing babies against the rocks because God ordered you to, etc).  Special pleading up in this bitch. X3

/sigh
It seems BTF found that post and this one by Shane https://www.bogosity.tv/forum/index.php?topic=315.msg14151#msg14151 (probably not given he ignored the legal precedent I will mention later in this post.  Seriously though, check out Shane's original post--and mine!--and the ones following it until the end of that page of the thread.  Good stuff.) and replied with this: http://blamethe1st.deviantart.com/journal/Top-13-Even-More-Disturbing-MLP-FiM-Fan-Works-1-412432964
Specifically:

"Their main argument, and the most flimsy, is that these underage characters are only fictional, and thus porn of them doesn’t count as real child porn.

Sorry. That doesn’t fly with me. As I said in my last list, fictional or not, an underage minor is still an underage minor, and porn featuring them is still child porn, which, last time I checked, is illegal."
See Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition.
So thought crimes and victimless crimes now.  Lovely.
"Thinking about sex with children is one thing, but putting it in material form is quite another."
Distinction without a difference.  Still a victimless crime.
I liked Hawkeye's comments in the journal, and his thoughts on this too:
"It comes down to one simple question.
Okay, real live child porn is bad because it requires you to have done something very wrong to a very real live child.  That much is not being questioned.
Now, someone draws a picture of a child in a sexual situation.  It's a drawing, the child is fictional, nothing has actually been done past scribbling on a paper.
What exactly is the moral argument against this?
You're going down the realm of thought policing here and there's no argument to be made for that as it's always completely arbitrary."

It's one thing if you just think about it, but quite another when you act upon those thoughts. Trying to claim this is okay because they're not real anyway seems very hazy to me.
(>>hazy; only to someone who has trouble differentiating between reality and fiction)

Not really.  No victim = no crime.  It's really very cut and dry.
The alternative is thought policing and no good can come of that.


Finally, this all avoids a more overarching issue.  One that's been touched on with the 'illegal alien' argument refutations.  Just because something is illegal (e.g. doing drugs, not paying taxes for wars you think are immoral, etc) does not mean it is wrong.  And just because something is legal (slavery comes to mind here) does not make it right...Last I checked, the state is not the ultimate arbiter of morality.  Or it means that the state can do no wrong.

[dallen68]

/sigh
It seems BTF found that post and this one by Shane https://www.bogosity.tv/forum/index.php?topic=315.msg14151#msg14151 (probably not given he ignored the legal precedent I will mention later in this post.  Seriously though check Shane's original post out and the ones following it until the end of that page of the thread.  Good stuff.) and replied with this: http://blamethe1st.deviantart.com/journal/Top-13-Even-More-Disturbing-MLP-FiM-Fan-Works-1-412432964
Specifically:

"Their main argument, and the most flimsy, is that these underage characters are only fictional, and thus porn of them doesn't count as real child porn.

Sorry. That doesn't fly with me. As I said in my last list, fictional or not, an underage minor is still an underage minor, and porn featuring them is still child porn, which, last time I checked, is illegal."
See Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition.
So thought crimes and victimless crimes now.  Lovely.
"Thinking about sex with children is one thing, but putting it in material form is quite another."
Semantic nip-picking. Still a victimless crime.
I liked Hawkeye's comments in the journal, and his thoughts on this too:
"It comes down to one simple question.
Okay, real live child porn is bad because it requires you to have done something very wrong to a very real live child.  That much is not being questioned.
Now, someone draws a picture of a child in a sexual situation.  It's a drawing, the child is fictional, nothing has actually been done past scribbling on a paper.
What exactly is the moral argument against this?
You're going down the realm of thought policing here and there's no argument to be made for that as it's always completely arbitrary."

It's one thing if you just think about it, but quite another when you act upon those thoughts. Trying to claim this is okay because they're not real anyway seems very hazy to me.

Not really.  No victim = no crime.  It's really very cut and dry.
The alternative is thought policing and no good can come of that.


Finally, this all avoids a more overarching issue.  One that's been touched on with the 'illegal alien' argument refutations.  Just because something is illegal (e.g. doing drugs, not paying taxes for wars you think are immoral, etc) does not mean it is wrong.  And just because something is legal (slavery comes to mind here) does not make it right...Last I checked, the state is not the ultimate arbiter of morality.  Or it means that the state can do no wrong.

To add to that: technically, virtual child pornography (or any other kind of virtual pornography) is not illegal. In order to be convicted of CP, there has to be an actual, identifiable person. 

[MrBogosity]

To add to that: technically, virtual child pornography (or any other kind of virtual pornography) is not illegal. In order to be convicted of CP, there has to be an actual, identifiable person. 

Who is underage. Of-age models dressing younger DOES NOT COUNT.

[R.E.H.W.R.]

[yt]pelRvXHsF3k[/yt]

[nilecroc]

[yt]pelRvXHsF3k[/yt]

I like how the lawyer said that kids say the pledge to their "national unity" (wtf does that even mean? kids are united without ever even meeting each other because the say overrated chant? wtf?) in a way that validate religious beliefs, and basically called it indoctrination, but the only problem he had with it is under god being in the pledge.

[Travis Retriever]

"The High Elves are the Nazis of Skyrim."--random pillock
I guess he forgot that not all High Elves in Skryim are Thalmor (but hey, it's only bigotry/painting with too broad a brush when people I don't like do it, amirite gaiz?).  While also ignoring that the interventionism and nation building they do is actually more reminiscent of U.S. Foreign policy.  And in fact, D has pointed out that in TES: Online; the Thalmor faction has as an animal symbol of, get this:  The Eagle.  Something tells me that's not a coincidence.