Jump to content

What’s your most Controversial opinion?


Juror#8

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:

Just FYI, only in ATL will they cancel schools and everything else, along with emptying the store shelves, for even the chance that we get a dusting. My fav is watching local news gear up like our tectonic plate just swapped out with Greenland’s. It does snow prob once or maybe twice in a season, and usually is gone by the following day; but wow, those 24 hours are something to behold. And no one here has adequate tires for even that, to say nothing of driving skills for it. So my life and limbs are still prob in more danger over that one day on the roads than yours for an entire winter ?.

Yeah. I live in Houston, and about year ago, we got about 3 inches of snow. First thing I did was go to the supermarket. Not because the world was ending, I just needed a few things. People were panicking. I was in my Bills hoodie, and I saw a guy in a Steelers hat. We both just give each other this look like "Yeah, these people are nuts."

My work basically said if you can make it, great, if not, stay home, it won't count against you. Being from Buffalo, I decided that I could handle it. So I'm getting ready, and the news shows all the traffic accidents. "That's on my way to work. That one is too. Oh hell, that's three just on my route." So I just stayed there and drank.

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

8 hours ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:

Just FYI, only in ATL will they cancel schools and everything else, along with emptying the store shelves, for even the chance that we get a dusting. My fav is watching local news gear up like our tectonic plate just swapped out with Greenland’s. It does snow prob once or maybe twice in a season, and usually is gone by the following day; but wow, those 24 hours are something to behold. And no one here has adequate tires for even that, to say nothing of driving skills for it. So my life and limbs are still prob in more danger over that one day on the roads than yours for an entire winter ?.

 

Treat it as a chilly hurricane party. Screw the bread and load up on beverages! 

15 minutes ago, SinceThe70s said:

 

There is nothing wrong with ketchup on a hot dog. And I'll up the ante - mustard flat out sucks!

 

 

 

Ketchup is OK if you do it right, but don’t diss the mustard. Mustard with onions is a fine option! 

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

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."

Edited by Mark80
  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, bills_fan said:

Legalize, tax and regulate all drugs. 

Pardon anyone currently incarcerated for non-violent drug offenses.

My views are even more controversial. Lol. 

 

Use all the drugs you want. Just know the American taxpayers aren't gonna save you when you overdose. As I've mentioned before, I believe basically all taxation is theft, and that inclues "sin taxes" like this one.

Edited by The Real Buffalo Joe
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Real Buffalo Joe said:

My views are even more controversial. Lol. 

 

Use all the drugs you want. Just know the American taxpayers aren't gonna save you when you overdose. As I've mentioned before, I believe basically all taxation is theft, and that inclues "sin taxes" like this one.

 

 

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 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 don't really want "quality control" so much as just making sure they already follow the laws on the books as far as false/misleading advertising, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/20/2019 at 8:16 PM, Boyst62 said:

Jet fuel can't melt steel beams.

Jet fuel is just highly refined kerosene. It can only melt steel when it, and lots and lots of oxygen are highly compressed then combusted at the perfect stoiochometric ratio and exhausted in a highly focused jet. 

 

But you are generally correct with your implication - it's just kerosene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, BUFFALOKIE said:

Jet fuel is just highly refined kerosene. It can only melt steel when it, and lots and lots of oxygen are highly compressed then combusted at the perfect stoiochometric ratio and exhausted in a highly focused jet. 

 

But you are generally correct with your implication - it's just kerosene.

Ummmm. I can't even reply.   Yikes. You must be new to the internet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

Ummmm. I can't even reply.   Yikes. You must be new to the internet

Why? I agreed with you. Jet fuel (kerosene) cannot melt steel except in a very highly controlled environment. Not the case in a plane crash. Did I miss some sarcasm? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BUFFALOKIE said:

Why? I agreed with you. Jet fuel (kerosene) cannot melt steel except in a very highly controlled environment. Not the case in a plane crash. Did I miss some sarcasm? 

It's an old internet joke, my bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...