Jump to content

What’s your most Controversial opinion?


Juror#8

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Mark80 said:

Trial by "a jury of your peers" is stupid.  We expect all people to be able to interpret and apply rules of law (including the ones of below average intelligence), yet you have to go to undergrad, law school, and pass the bar exam to be able to practice law, but any Joe Schmo can be put on a jury to interpret and apply complicated nuances of law that could lead to you being put in jail.  Not good, not good at all.

 

are you implying that justice should be served by a select elite?  how very aristocratic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bills_fan said:

 

 

I can well appreciate your view.  The "regulate" portion of that is so that an individual can be confident on what he/she is actually purchasing and won't kill them on the spot. Someone has to pay for that level of quality control. Hence the "tax" part of my position.

I should also point out that I understand that realistically, it will never get to the unregulated point I want. At least not any time soon, so I'd settle for a legalize/tax/regulate. Although I think Larry Sharpe said it best. "Hemp and marijuana should be regulated like onions. No difference. If you can grow onion in your backyard, you can grow hemp or weed in your backyard. If you can grow onions in your farm, your family farm, you can grow help or marijuana in your family farm."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The opening for “Maude” is better than the opening for “Cheers” and perhaps the best opening sequence and song of any tv show ever. 

 

 

10 hours ago, Mark80 said:

Trial by "a jury of your peers" is stupid.  We expect all people to be able to interpret and apply rules of law (including the ones of below average intelligence), yet you have to go to undergrad, law school, and pass the bar exam to be able to practice law, but any Joe Schmo can be put on a jury to interpret and apply complicated nuances of law that could lead to you being put in jail.  Not good, not good at all.

 

Political parties should be banned.  As George Washington so gracefully predicted in his farewell address regarding them:

 

"All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.

 

However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion."

 

It’s freakin fantastic that people used to talk/write like that. It probably took George Washington a hot second to write that and it’s just delightful to read. 

 

Now people write meanigful ***** in text shorthand. 

 

What the ***** happened to civilization?

Edited by Juror#8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Real Buffalo Joe said:

"Personally pro life, but politically pro choice" is an inconsistent view to hold. If you're personally pro life, that means that you understand that the unborn fetus is a child. So if you hold to this view, you're basically saying that you believe the child is a human being, but people should have the right to kill it anyway. 

 

One can disagree with abortion, yet respect women enough to choose what to do with their own body.  Don't confuse, "inconsistent," with "independent," as far as thought is concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Your Shawshank opinion .... I  ... I just don't get it.

It's a good movie, but its not one of the greatest of all time.  It has too many stereotypes (corrupt warden, thuggish prison guard).  There's too much unnecessary narration that distracts from the visuals and often doesn't allow the viewer to infer what is happening in a scene.  Morgan's Freeman character is too nice to believe that he could've ever killed anybody when he was younger.  Tim Robbin's character is underdeveloped as I really don't care about him with his lack of lines and a back story.  

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

It's a good movie, but its not one of the greatest of all time.  It has too many stereotypes (corrupt warden, thuggish prison guard).  There's too much unnecessary narration that distracts from the visuals and often doesn't allow the viewer to infer what is happening in a scene.  Morgan's Freeman character is too nice to believe that he could've ever killed anybody when he was younger.  Tim Robbin's character is underdeveloped as I really don't care about him with his lack of lines and a back story.  

 

All fair points.  Can we at least agree that Forrest Gump should not have beaten Shawshank out for Best Picture???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

You think?

 

Hanks as a naive and earnest man, plus other    pitiful qualities always win

 

but he was the same person in Bachelor Party

 

Gump beats the Gimp every time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...