Lurker > Accrovideogames

That's not going to help. If someone wants to murder you in your sleep, they can simply shoot you in the head or cut your throat. A body armor isn't going to be of any help.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

If you don't know who the man is, he's basically the Canadian version of Adolf Hitler. He believed in the superior Aryan race. He kidnapped indigenous children to put them in concentration camps where they were tortured, medically experimented on, and "taught" how to behave. He cut off food supplies to indigenous populations in order to starve them and force them to accept new fascist policies that totally worked against them. He weaponized starvation to clear out the path for a railroad. He also stole their property and forced them to become either homeless or live in concentration camps (separate from their children).

He formed the RCMP, a repressive police force whose primary purpose was (and still is) to persecute indigenous people (similarly to Rampart C.R.A.S.H. against black people). He criminalized homosexuality by imposing the death penalty on gays. He also criminalized abortion in the same way. He enforced a racist head tax on non Aryan people, so if you were Asian or black you had to pay more taxes. He also made sure that only Aryan people could vote. He treated francophones like dogs and even called them that in his speeches.

When people rebelled against him, he made an example of their leaders by mass slaughtering them in public as a form of spectacle. As for the main leader Louis Riel who was a Mtis (i.e. "halfbreed" of First Nations and European settlers, a.k.a. mixed), he made a farce of his trial by moving it in a city where he could be judged by a jury of white people only who also happened to be supporters of Macdonald. He used the ancient British high treason law that carried the death penalty and ignored the floods of protests and petitions in support of Riel. Louis Riel was hanged.

Why the hell am I talking about him now? That's because amid protests against police brutality and racism, one of his monuments was recently toppled and decapitated. It's not the first time one of his many monuments and statues were vandalized across the country. We even had his fucking face on the $10 bill until 2018 when he was finally removed (it took that long?!). Just imagine how it would be if Adolf Hitler had monuments and statues all over Germany and his face was on their money. The recently decapitated statue was in Montreal. The city mayor Valrie Plante actually had the audacity to condemn the vandalization and promised to restore the statue and put it back in place. What a fucking prick she is. The same goes for Justin Trudeau, the country's prime minister, who is also defending John A. Macdonald.

Fuck John A. Macdonald. If I had the power, I would have removed all of his monuments and his face on the $10 bill a long time ago, and also make sure they teach children in school above his crimes (our shitty education system actually does the opposite, and we're also supposed to believe all the lies about Christopher Columbus, but that's another story). Protests against him are nothing new, people have petitioned the government to remove his many monuments and his face on the $10 bill for decades now. We recently won the fight for the $10 bill, but we still have a long way to go because there are countless monuments and statues in his honor across the country. They never listened and now they're upset that some people took matters into their own hands by destroying one of his monuments?

The only reason why I'm not out protesting in the streets right now is because of the pandemic. Instead, I'm protesting online and educating people about it.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Butthole Rage

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Zeus posted...

You have to be less blatant in your trolling, makes it too easy to figure out.

When Zeus calls someone a troll, that person must be doing something right.

Zeus posted...

And you seem to be advocating mass infection because you don't want to use your magic button to end COVID and just want to kill more people than would ever be killed by COVID.

The dilemma I posed was whether or not you would sacrifice all the covidiots to save humanity. Without the covidiots who keep spreading the virus, the pandemic would be contained within a few weeks. The number of new cases would drop significantly until it became zero. Of course I would magically end COVID-19 without killing anyone if it was possible, but that's not what the philosophical question is about. The whole point of this topic is to be a thought experiment, one that poses an ethical dilemma.

A popular ethical dilemma is the trolley problem. There is a runaway trolley barreling down the railway tracks. Ahead, on the tracks, there are five people tied up and unable to move. The trolley is headed straight for them. You are standing some distance off in the train yard, next to a lever. If you pull this lever, the trolley will switch to a different set of tracks. However, you notice that there is one person on the side track. You have two options:

1. Do nothing and allow the trolley to kill the five people on the main track.
2. Pull the lever, diverting the trolley onto the side track where it will kill one person.

Which is the more ethical option? Or, more simply: What is the right thing to do?

Personally, I would pull the lever. What would you do? My choice would actually differ if new variables were added. For example, if the five people were strangers and the single person a loved one, I would selfishly do nothing. If the five people were old and didn't have much time left, and the single person is a baby, I would do nothing. If the five people chose to be there with the intention of committing suicide, while the single person just happened to be there, I would do nothing. I think you get the idea.

Zeus posted...

By your revised definitions, you would be killing 60-70% of the planet. You, sir, are worse than Thanos!

I'm pretty sure covidiots are a minority. And Thanos' plan is to randomly wipe out half of the planet's population without any discrimination. If wiping out half of the human population was inevitable (in Thanos's case, there's a third option) and I was offered the chance to choose who live and who die, I would start making a list of criteria.

Zeus posted...

More importantly, you claim that you're taking proper precaution then outright admit that you're not taking enough precautions. Your covidiocy risks spreading the disease. And factoring in people who THINK that they're on the right side but aren't taking proper precautions, you might as well use your button 90% of the population... at which point there may still be some COVID left, but more importantly, society would collapse and a new dark age would start.

No, I'm taking all the necessary precautions. Some people around me who also take their precautions think I'm exaggerating. I take the pandemic extremely seriously. I only go out when absolutely necessary. I barely leave home, I don't see any friends, I don't do any activities, I do nothing. The only times I leave is for important groceries I can't order online, and when I'm out to save old people from starvation. I started wearing a mask as soon as the pandemic started. The problem is that it doesn't matter how many precautions I take, there's always the risk that some drunk asshole runs me over while I'm on the sidewalk. You may be wearing your seat belt and never going over the speed limit, you never know if some asshole is going to burn a red light and crash into your car.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

papercup posted...

The table that SWK linked to prove his point completely disproves his point...

He's in denial, a serious case of denial. It's just like the Holocaust deniers, the flat earth idiots, the anti-vaxxers, etc.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

SunWuKung420 posted...

Combining confirmed and presumed (assumed) in the same scientific statement is the most unscientific thing aside from inventing data. Actually presumed (and assumed) is inventing data so it's not science.

For fuck sake, those (less than) 7,000 deaths in the US are those caused by the flu and the flu only! You keep saying those are the only "actual" COVID-19 deaths when they actually have nothing to do with it. All "presumed" (as you say) COVID-19 deaths were all confirmed to have tested positive to the virus and were caused by SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome). They do say "all confirmed and presumed deaths" in the article you posted. They only added the word "presumed" just in case one of those deaths wasn't directly caused by COVID-19 despite the patient having tested positive and having died of SARS.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

LinkPizza posted...

I just found a few articles online while as work that said that while its possible to get it a second time, its unlikely. And no offense, but I think Ill believe the scientist from the article than a random person online...

Reinfection within a short time frame is indeed unlikely, as you do develop a resistance. But this resistance wears out quickly. I've seen reported cases of reinfection after only one month after surviving a previous one.

https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/2020/07/24/covid-reinfection
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-52446965
https://www.health.com/condition/infectious-diseases/coronavirus/can-you-get-coronavirus-twice

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

LinkPizza posted...

You can, but I also read that it's unlikely. Meaning that it could slow down over time...

No, the only thing unlikely is that a second infection will kill you. If you survived from it once, you are less likely to die from it. This isn't a guarantee however. The more you get infected, the more likely you'll suffer complications and die from it. To better explain it, I will give you an analogy. Do note that the numbers aren't actually accurate and are only meant as a representation of what I mean.

You catch the virus for the first time, your chance of survival is 90%.
Should you survive and catch it a second time, your chance of survival is 92%.
Should you survive and catch it a third time, your chance of survival is 93%.
Should you survive and catch it a fourth time, your chance of survival is 93.5%.

This continues on an on. While individually speaking, your chances of survival are higher than the previous time, the risk of dying does increase the more you get infected.

Probability of surviving one infection: 90%
Probability of surviving two infections in a row: 83%
Probability of surviving three infections in a row: 77%
Probability of surviving four infections in a row: 72%

LinkPizza posted...

Just because they haven't made one ye doesn't mean they won't. That's how science works... They eventually make new stuff...

And you really want to bet your future on that? They've been trying to find a vaccine for coronaviruses for over 30 years now and they never found one. They've been trying to do the same for AIDS and they still failed repeatedly. No, we need to face reality and accept the truth: there won't be a vaccine. Vaccines only work when acquired immunity exists, and that doesn't exist for COVID-19. Maybe in 500 years we'll find a cure for cancer, AIDS and SARS (aka what COVID-19 actually is), but it won't be a vaccine.

SunWuKung420 posted...

TC left that word out (presumed) because it's the nail in the coffin regarding how many people have actually died from covid.

And you left out the word "confirmed".

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

SunWuKung420 posted...

TC thinks "presumed" is a valid statistic. Lol

COVID-19 deniers are the worse.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

SunWuKung420 posted...

"Deaths with confirmed or presumed COVID-19, coded to ICD10 code U07.1" are 170k.

"Counts of deaths involving influenza include deaths with pneumonia or COVID-19 also listed as a cause of death." are less than 7k.

Wow, just wow. I can't believe I read something this stupid.

US Statistics
All deaths involving COVID-19: 167,558
Deaths involving pneumonia, with or without COVID-19, excluding influenza: 171,800
Deaths involving both pneumonia and COVID-19, excluding influenza: 74,236
All deaths involving influenza, with or without COVID-19 or pneumonia: 6,655
Deaths involving pneumonia, influenza or COVID-19: 270,792

How to read these numbers: Since the pandemic started, a total of at least 270,792 people died in the US due to pneumonia, influenza or COVID-19. If we only count COVID-19 deaths, the total is at least 167,558 people. The difference between the two involve pneumonia and/or influenza deaths, but not COVID-19. Nearly 170,000 is a lot more than less than 7,000.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbxwGi8bTO8

Remember that pressing the button would get rid of these people.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Escape from Butthole

Far-Queue posted...

Thanks for upholding the integrity of this topic about buttholes. What would we do without you

It's a pleasure to be of service!

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Zeus posted...

Until a vaccine comes out or people build a natural herd immunity

But there will NEVER be a vaccine. The search for one is a delusion, a fairy tale.

Zeus posted...

Conversely, if you said "eliminate everybody who currently has COVID," then that would *actually* get rid of COVID and do it with maybe a quarter of the casualties that your idiotic plan would inflict

Except that would kill a lot of innocent people. There are people risking their lives to save patients in hospitals, those people are heroes and yet they still get infected because some patients are uncooperative and spitting on medical staff for holding them captive against their wills. These patients would rather leave the hospital and infect as many people as they can. And it's not just the medical staff, there are terrorists spitting and coughing on food for the "lulz" because they want to infect people. Even the people who are smart enough (i.e. the majority) to practice social distancing measures are at risk of contracting the virus because of those terrorists.

Even if you do everything to avoid contracting the virus, there's a very small chance that you'll be extremely unlucky and still get infected. Personally, I assume that everyone including myself could be infected, so I always keep my distance, don't touch my face, wash my hands, wear a mask, etc. But I don't live alone, and while everyone in my household take the necessary precautions, you never know what could happen. I met my fair share of assholes who wouldn't respect my personal space and who wouldn't wear a mask despite it being illegal where I live. I deliver food to the elderly, it's volunteered work (I don't get paid) and I've been doing it since before the pandemic started. I'd rather only the evil ones get killed instead of risking a single innocent life.

Zeus posted...

that would still be a horrific mass murder.

Because what the covidiots are doing aren't already a horrific mass murder?

Krazy_Kirby posted...

how about elderly/compromised/cowards stay home. let other people work and shop if they want to

So you want them to stay home indefinitely? Because as long as covidiots exist, the pandemic will never end.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

bshwalker posted...

The Butthole of Norte Dame

It's "notre", not "norte".

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

LinkPizza posted...

In the end, we could talk about this all day. But nothing you say will make me push the button to kill who knows how many people. Especially since a majority of them could be innocent. Being stupid isnt a crime. And I wont just kill someone for it. If that gets your rocks off, more power to you. Killing people isnt my thing...

That's fair. I may disagree with you but most of your arguments are understandable.

Zeus posted...

>Claims to be concerned about mass casualties
>Literally advocates murdering more people than have died of COVID

As far as wildly offensive troll topics go, it's a good one. It's doubly fun since this is one of those topics that shows the hypocrisy of the mod team, since you're literally advocating mass murder on a scale that conceivably dwarfs every other mass murder in history.

But most people would actually press that button, so it's a popular opinion. And there's a difference between executing murderers to save humanity and allow this pandemic to continue forever, killing more and more innocent people. Would you say the same if we were in 1944 and I was advocating executing every single Nazis on the planet?

As long as covidiots are around, this pandemic will never end. Are you actually willing to live like this for the rest of your life? There will never be a vaccine, scientists have been trying to find one for coronaviruses for decades now and one was never found. A vaccine is a biological preparation that provides active acquired immunity to a particular infectious disease. Acquired immunity is what you get after surviving an infection (that is, if you survive). Not all pathogens grant acquired immunity. Examples of those that do are the flu, tetanus, polio, measles, smallpox, etc. Before you say something stupid like "but I was vaccinated against the flu and still got it", be aware that there are thousands of strands of flu, so you may be immune to one but not another.

Unfortunately, our immune systems can't develop immunity for coronaviruses. This means that even if you survive it, you may catch it over and over again. The only way to get rid of this virus altogether is by quarantining. If everyone had done that, the pandemic would have been over only two weeks after it started. This is what I mean by saving humanity. Unless you can convince everyone to quarantine, it will never end. But since covidiots exist, everyone has to suffer forever.

Remember the "over-exaggeration" over A-H1N1 back in 2009? It was a particularly deadly type of flu. It was responsible for the deaths of 50 million people in 1918-1919. More than 50% of the population contracted it during that century old pandemic because no one was practicing social distancing. It's also much less deadly than COVID-19, so just imagine how the world would be like if governments weren't enforcing quarantining measures? So how come humanity wasn't wiped out in 1918? That's because once someone survived the infection, they got acquired immunity. If it wasn't for that, we would still be suffering from it.

After having calculated the difference in death rate between A-H1N1 and COVID-19, if we weren't practicing social distancing, over 180 million people would be dead by the end of this year. The number of deaths would gradually become lower until only a few millions were killed each year by the virus. The reason for this is because not everyone dies from it. Those who survive it once would keep getting infected over and over again until they grow too weak or too old to be able to survive it anymore. Our life expectancy would drastically lower (approximately 65 years old). Combined with a much higher infantile death rate, our population would be significantly lower. And don't forget that a high percentage of survivors develop permanent damage, so we'll have more and more people suffering from chronic respiratory diseases. The world would truly be a horrible place to live in.

If you think pressing that button is evil, there's something wrong with you. At the very least, I'm relieved to see that a majority of voters would actually press it.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

LinkPizza posted...

I see no proof that the covidiots are causing thousands of deaths.

Do you even watch the news? They talk about covidiots going to parties and infecting people for the "lulz". In most of these stories, people died.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Inside the Butthole

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

LinkPizza posted...

Does it matter? Killing them won't bring my loved ones back. It just makes me a murderer who also has no loved ones. So, it doesn't change anything except make me a worse person.

But aren't you afraid that your loved ones and/or you will get killed? Don't you want to prevent deaths that could easily be avoided by getting rid of the covidiots who are killing thousands of people everyday? Do you even care about the people who will die tomorrow because of them?

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

LinkPizza posted...

You'd have to know they were going to kill someone, though. Not all of them will be responsible for the spread. While some don't care about the disease, it doesn't matter if they don't really go many places, anyway. If they never catch or spread it, then you'd be killing someone who is technically innocent.

When someone blindfolds himself, spins around and repeatedly shoots in random directions, there's no guarantee that he'll kill someone. Is someone drinking and driving innocent even if he doesn't kill anyone? A covidiot also doesn't need to catch the virus and spread it to kill people, simply spreading misinformation is putting people's lives at risk.

LinkPizza posted...

Or killing kids who just trust what their parents tell them.

I agree that killing kids who blindly believe their stupid parents is tragic. Even if you could argue that it's no different than blaming the parents of a murderous sociopath instead of the sociopath himself, I would actually feel sad for the kids in question. Pedophiles are more often than not former victims of pedophilia themselves. If you get raped as a child, there's a good chance you'll do the same once you grow into an adult. We repeat what we're told and shown, so is such a pedophile innocent? If it can make you feel better about sacrificing those kids, you can think of it as their parents being responsible for their deaths, not you.

LinkPizza posted...

Personally, I'm not about killing anyone, anyway. I'll let others handle it. If someone else wants to just go around killing whoever, including innocent people, then they can. But I wouldn't, nor would I help them to do it...

What if the people they kill are your loved ones and/or you? Would you still let them do it? And turning a blind eye can be argued as being the same as helping them. I recently read an article that compared people denying COVID-19 to those who turned a blind eye during WWII. After the war, allied soldiers forced people who were living peacefully and plowing their yard near concentration camps to come see the suffering they allowed to happen. The writer of the article suggested doing the same with covidiots, forcing them to visit hospitals and see how much people are suffering from the virus, that medical staff are risking their lives, and that their stupid behaviors are allowing this to happen. I unfortunately couldn't find the article, but I remember it was written around the time the pandemic started.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

WastelandCowboy posted...

People die. That's a fact of life. You're born, you live, you die. It's unfortunate that this pandemic has killed so many people across the world, but that's the point of a disease - to infect the host. Whether or not they die is up to their body. You, however, have the choice to kill these people. Unlike Covid-19, you know the consequences of killing these people. Covid-19 doesn't know the consequences. It just acts without conscience.

But you have people who choose to further spread the disease and disregard human lives. Would you rather allow them to continue murdering innocent lives? Would you kill a spree killer to save future victims?

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

SpeedDemon20 posted...

I'll wait a few days for it to propagate further.

Do you realize that this makes you a covidiot and that pressing the button will also cause your death?

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

WastelandCowboy posted...

No. Killing people regardless of their actions is wrong. You are not the judge, jury, and executioner.

Tell that to the 840,000+ people who died of it in less than a year, which is more than the Holocaust's death rate.

faramir77 posted...

I'd want to, but wouldn't do it. There are far more COVID deniers and anti maskers than there are people who will die from it. Millions of people are going to die because of them, but that's their burden to hold. I don't want the burden of knowing I killed hundreds of millions of stupid people.

That's understandable, but would you still say that if people you loved actually died because of them? Instead of focusing on the number of deaths you'd cause, you should focus on the number of lives you'd save. Should you kill all mass murderers before they have a chance to kill innocent people?

faramir77 posted...

If everyone had acted like I did, this would have been over by May at the absolute latest. People are fucking stupid.

And thanks to those stupid people, the pandemic will never end.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

SpeedDemon20 posted...

Do I have to push it immediately or can I wait for it to propagate further?

What do you mean? This is about killing covidiots, not people infected with COVID-19. Covidiots are people who deny the pandemic, don't practice social distancing, don't wear a mask, don't give a shit about getting infected and infecting other people, etc.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Why die in their sleep? Because if they have to drop dead now, collateral casualties could be involved, e.g. if one of them is driving a vehicle. This is based on a popular philosophical question. Are you willing to sacrifice all the bad apples to save humanity?

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Super Size Butthole

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

You're right. it should be by popular vote, aka the only thing that guarantees equal representation, and not the antiquidated and senseless EC.

Plus electoral colleges are often exploited to optimize the number of seats for a single party. They adjust the borders for the best possible results. GOP is particularly guilty of this.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Revelation34 posted...

His conspiracies are not right.

I bet you rather believe pizzagate, birthers, Biden is senile, etc. It's people like you that makes it easy for Russia and its allies to manipulate you.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Revelation34 posted...

Yes he's right. Russia is totally going to invade now.

They don't need to, the US is already doing all the work by self-destructing. And they don't want to because that would make other nations intervene. The entire point of dividing the US is to weaken it. When a country is weakened, it loses global influence. With Trump pulling out of the WHO and ripping up all treaties, the US has essentially lost its influence. Everyone are laughing at Americans and ignoring them. Africa is now refusing their help because they know they are better off without them, which is a huge change. Russia profited from the situation by increasing its global influence. The communist countries now have more global influence than the US and its former allies.

OhhhJa posted...

Russia is a borderline literal hellscape with massive infrastructure problems. To think they're actually a real threat to our democracy is hilarious. The threat to our democracy is from within. Thats why our government wants to point fingers outward

You don't get it. Russia help stoke racial tensions. They spread Fake News all over social media to incite more civil unrest in the US. The fact the the threat to your democracy comes from within is thanks to Russia and its allies. What better way to get rid of an opponent by destabilizing it and making it destroy itself from within?

Sonicplys posted...

I'm voting for Kayne West

Proof that American democracy is a thing of the past. Now people are voting for idiots with no experience (like Trump). The senate and congress are becoming a fake reality show. The movie Idiocracy has indeed become a documentary, as it's now reality.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

OhhhJa posted...

Lol imagine thinking russia actually has this much power. Leftists need to loosen those tinfoil hats up ffs

https://tinyurl.com/how-russian-fake-news-hardened
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/30/pentagon-russia-influence-putin-trump-1535243
https://tinyurl.com/how-russia-went-from-uniting-t
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/10/us/politics/russian-interference-race.html

I had to shorten some of the URLs because GameFAQs doesn't allow links that are too long.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

The reason why Russia intervened with the 2016 election was to weaken the US by dividing it. They helped Trump win by spreading conspiracy theories about Clinton. Now that Trump is president, the country has been a real shithole. Russia is really happy now that the US is the entire world's laughing stock. They successfully divided the country even more than before. Civil unrest in the US and a weak administration under Trump's "leadership" allowed Russia to beat the US in terms of global influence. They stoked racial tensions by creating and spreading "Fake News" all over social media. Russia's goal is to bring down American democracy and they're getting closer to that goal.

The pandemic also was a godsend for them. Thanks to its mishandling by the Trump administration, the US faces 150,000+ deaths (and counting) and even more civil unrest. While liberals and conservatives are busy fighting with each other, Russia took the opportunity to slip by and increase their power. In fact, Russia has been trying to divide the US ever since the start of the Cold War, but they weren't really successful until now. The 2016 election was a huge success for Russia. Whenever I see Americans fighting among themselves, I hear the following:

https://youtu.be/DAz7Bdqi2iQ?t=10

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

SunWuKung420 posted...

It's more like "I'm dealing with depression" music.

Dang, I actually didn't realize this until you pointed it out. You're absolutely right. It definitely explains a lot of things. I definitely feel empowered in depression whenever I listen to it.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

captpackrat posted...

A potted plant would do less damage to the country than what Trump has done.

https://i.imgur.com/8rI3iO0.png

jonathonbrad posted...

No S@#$ Sherlock but Biden is the worse molester.Who da F$#@ wants to kiss and grab a grandma? Trump at least goes for the slutty ones.

More like the younger ones, like 12-13 years old.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Revelation34 posted...

Sounds like a shitty law. People should only be charged if they shoot an unarmed person or if the armed person threatens them.

Don't listen to blindreflection, it's a lie. You definitely can defend yourself in other countries. You may use reasonable force to fend off a thief in your own house. Normally, when you're threatened, you can do the following:

If you can safely retreat, you must do so instead of using deadly force. If you instead attack the criminal with deadly force, you're not acting in self-defense. For example, someone threatens to stab you but you can safely run away. Punching someone is usually not deadly force (it is if you beat someone to death), so that's allowed even if you can safely retreat (you may still be charged with assault if it wasn't reasonable to do so). Deadly force is anything that could potentially kill someone, for example stabbing with a knife or hitting someone's head with a baseball bat.

You don't have the duty to retreat if someone else's life is in danger. If that other person is incapable of retreating or attempting to do so is risky, then you may use deadly force in defense of someone else. You also don't have the duty to retreat if you're in your own home or vehicle, this is called the castle doctrine. For example, if someone breaks into your house, it doesn't matter if you can safely retreat and leave the house, you have the right to defend your property. The castle doctrine applies to any legally occupied place, not just your home or vehicle but those two are the most common examples.

You may only use proportionally reasonable force when defending yourself, someone else or your "castle". Reasonable force is whatever you think is reasonable. Stabbing an unarmed man is not reasonable, but threatening to use it against him is. However, it does become reasonable if the man doesn't care and jumps at you. You may only use deadly force if you have reason to believe that your life or someone else's life is in imminent danger. The castle doctrine is no exception to that rule, all it does is making retreat optional. If a robber breaks into your house and you surprise him by shooting him in the head, it's second degree murder with attenuating circumstances.

If you stab a man in self-defense then proceed to repeatedly stab him after he collapsed on the ground, it's not reasonable. If you've successfully disarmed an armed man and proceed to execute him, it's first or second degree murder with aggravating circumstances, first if you had time to cool off before executing him and second if it was in the heat of the moment. Once a criminal is neutralized, you don't have the right to harm him. If you managed to knock him out and tie him up, you must wait for the police to arrest him.

Decoy77 posted...

He pointed an AK and SHOT IT at him, and got shot back for it.

Super fair. NEXT!

Perry was the first to shoot. He drove into the crowd of protesters and shot three times to bait Foster into shooting back, thus giving Perry an excuse to kill him in "self-defense". Except what Perry did is basically first degree murder, he admitted on social media of wanting to do exactly this and you can't use self-defense as an excuse when you're the aggressor. Foster was the one acting in self-defense.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

SunWuKung420 posted...

The rifle in the photo of the dead guy? Yes.
The murderer used the AK.

TC called the victim's weapon an AK-47:
mrduckbear posted...

Daniel fired 3 shots at Foster when the Air Force Veteran pointed an AK-47 at him as he drove into the crowd of protesters and tried to bait them into a fight

Foster, the one stated to have "pointed an AK-47", is the victim.

Revelation34 posted...

This isn't exactly true. You can own an automatic weapon if you make it so they can't fire.

Then it's no longer an automatic weapon but a toy. True automatic weapons are heavily restricted in the US. Automatic means rapid fire when you hold down the trigger and empty the magazine, e.g. a machine gun. Semi-automatic means one shot fired each time you pull the trigger, e.g. a pistol or sniper rifle. Manual is the same as semi-automatic, but you must manually reload each chamber after shooting, e.g. a revolver, a bolt-action rifle or a double-barreled shotgun.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

SunWuKung420 posted...

No military personal have ever brought back enemy guns as trophies, ever. /s

Simply possessing an automatic weapon in the US is a felony. The only people who can legally use them are the military and some police forces. Only the government may possess them, so a soldier can't keep one for personal use. The rifle in the picture is an AR-15 style rifle, a semi-automatic weapon.
---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

That's not an AK-47. Automatic weapons are prohibited everywhere, including the US.
---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Krazy_Kirby posted...

i have no symptoms, no reason to wear a mask

Asymptomatic transmission is a thing. Thousands of people are dying because of you. If you're infected, your mere presence is a threat to public health. Each time you touch something that is infected, the virus attaches itself to your hand (or whatever part of your body did the touching) and you can spread it by touching other surfaces. You get infected when the virus enters your month, nose or eyes. If you touch your face after touching a contaminated surface, you can get infected. This is why washing your hands is important. The virus can survive at least six hours on any surface so things like elevator buttons and door knobs are very dangerous.

Each time you talk or breath, small particles with the virus are spread in front of you. If no wind is involved, gravity makes those particles fall on the ground within two meters of you, hence why social distancing is important. Shouting can spread the virus even further, so don't do that. Wearing a mask makes sure to trap those particles, essentially protecting others from you. Wearing a mask may not protect you if other people around you aren't also wearing one. This is why everyone should be wearing a mask. Wearing a mask also won't protect you if you touch a contaminated surface before touching your mask or face, hence why both washing your hands and wearing a mask is important.

GanonsSpirit posted...

The flu doesn't have asymptomatic transmission.

Wrong, it actually does. Studies have shown that about half of infections are done asymptomatically. All viruses transmitted via air can be transmitted asymptomatically. Obviously, asymptomatic transmission spreads more slowly than symptomatic one. The reason for this is that people with symptoms cough and sneeze a lot, so particles with the virus are spread much further than if you were simply talking or breathing.

But comparing the flu with COVID-19 is like comparing a water gun with a tank. Unlike COVID-19, vaccination against the flu exists. Unlike COVID-19, once you survive a flu infection, you gain acquired immunity against the specific strain of the virus. Vaccination is when you give this acquired immunity to via injection, hence why vaccination against COVID-19 is impossible, as you can't gain acquired immunity against a coronavirus. The mortality rate of the flu is abysmally low compared to that of COVID-19. The flu has a kill rate of less than 0.1% while COVID-19 has one of 5-10%. The flu is estimated to kill around 8,000 people a year. With COVID-19, we're almost at 700,000 for half a year and that's with unprecedented social distancing measures.

The 1918 flu pandemic killed 50 million people in just two years. The virus responsible for this was the A-H1N1, the very same one the world freaked up about in 2009, exactly 100 years after the last pandemic of this virus. Because preventing another pandemic was successful, people accused the media of overreacting. If it wasn't for acquired immunity, the 1918 pandemic would have never ended. Now we're faced with a virus that spreads twice as easily, that kills 5,000% to 10,000% more of its infected hosts, that gives long term health complications to many of those who survive it, and that no one can get acquired immunity. In other words, we're screwed.

Without social distancing measures, we would be facing an infection rate of at least 50% and at least 190 million deaths caused by COVID-19 in just two years. To top it all off, the virus would never disappear because no one would be gaining acquired immunity against it. So more people will keep dying. With a mortality rate of over 15% for the elderly, our life expectancy will be significantly reduced. Infants are also extremely likely to suffer from severe illness caused by COVID-19, illness that often become permanent as it will affect them for the rest of their lives. Those born prematurely are even more at risk of dying or suffering from permanent damage. The fact that pregnant mothers infected by the virus are very likely to give birth prematurely, this is even worse. Expect a high infantile mortality rate and a life expectancy even lower as more and more people with severe pulmonary diseases are added to our ranks.

And then we have a shit ton of idiots who don't give a fuck about social distancing, wearing masks and washing hands. Their stupidity is already causing more senseless deaths than the cruelty of the Nazis during WWII. 700,000 in half a year is more than 6,000,000 in five years. At least the Nazis had the decency of murdering most of their victims as quickly and painlessly as possible. Those who die of COVID-19 always suffer a slow and painful death.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Lokarin posted...

yaknow... I haven't eaten anything extra, so you'd think a week of 2 hours in scorching weather per day would have made me lose weight, but NOPE!

That's not how weight loss works.

Lokarin posted...

Either there's calories in Coke Zero or I'm a dang anomaly

And there are calories in Coke Zero. The label is a lie, but it's legal thanks to a loophole that allows you to inaccurately count calories as long as the difference isn't greater than four. But there's a second loophole that allows manufacturers to label something as having zero calories even if the amount is higher than four. If the label says zero calories per serving and one serving is a fourth of the can, then you can safely assume that the drink contains 16 calories. And what are those calories of? Sugar, yes, it's pure sugar mixed with water. They can legally label something as not having sugar due to stupid loopholes. Thanks to lobbying and bribes, the government isn't willing to fix this.

Another problem with sugar "free" drinks is the fact that they also contain artificial sweeteners that aren't actually sugar but that your body treats as actual sugar. In other words, your body reacts the same way and so the fake sugar is no different than real sugar. Both cause the same problems in your body and can make you gain weight and/or cause various health problems such as cardiac arrest, hypertension and diabetes.

Lokarin posted...

Not necessarily; animals with volatile nesting grounds can test the area for predators with more disposable offspring. If the bright chicks are not attacked, then the nest is likely safe for the long term.

Huh no, colors have nothing to do with this. When a nest fails, parents learn from their mistakes and start over, making sure not to repeat the same mistakes. Making your chicks easier to see for your predators is counterproductive.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Lokarin posted...

Ah, there's a couple of theories

https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/604234/

https://www.pnas.org/content/117/4/2056.short

Basically it's a deathmatch for the first week and then the parents pick favoured children based on their brightness

What a bunch of bullshit. It has nothing to do with parasites and predators. The younger the chick, the more colorful it is. Coots hatch too many chicks in quick succession. Since the chicks range from babies to teenagers, they don't get to be equal in terms of strength. Just imagine human parents constantly breeding and finding yourself as the youngest sibling in a family of ten children. Each sibling is never more than one year older than the next. Now imagine the amount of food being limited and your parents being incapable of distinguishing the age of their children. Imagine having to fight against your older siblings to get your share of the food. Obviously, the fact that you're only a week old and you have siblings much older than you can only mean on thing: you're going to starve to death.

Thankfully, evolution made it so the younger you are, the more colorful you are. Your parents actually favor their colorful children more than those that aren't. They will fight for you, they will give more food to you. If your older siblings even dare to try stealing your bigger share, your parents will move them away, essentially fighting for you. This allows you to grow up and catch up with your older siblings. As you become older, you will eventually lose your colors and your parents will start liking you less, favoring your younger siblings because they're more colorful than you. But at this point, you're strong and capable. Once you're strong enough to live on your own, you'll just leave the nest and found your own family.

The whole parasitic thing makes no sense, because other species of chicks tend to be even less colorful than real coots. In other words, they'll look like the older true chicks but be as weak as the youngest true ones. So now you have the parent favoring its younger and more colorful chicks and actively preventing the parasites from eating enough food because they're seen as being older and more capable. Since they're too young and weak to fight for their share of the food, they die. No parasite birds in their right mind would think about laying their eggs in coot nests.

And your suggestion that the colors are meant to attract predators is absurd. It goes against all the laws of evolution. It makes absolutely no sense to work against your own species' survival and best interests. Although some scientists have wrongly believed the parasite theory to be true, none of them is dumb enough to suggest what you're saying.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

BlackScythe0 posted...

Zeus calls himself left leaning while always, ALWAYS, going into threads to defend the actions or reasoning behind neo-nazis and assorted white supremacists.

He's probably one of those with learning disabilities who can't tell left from right.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Mead posted...

video game did a cuss

i think

Oh, I didn't pay enough attention to notice hell was underlined. But how is it a curse word? Damn, the US is way too conservative when it comes to censoring words for no reason. Where I live, hell and shit have always been okay and damn stopped being frowned upon more than 50 years ago. But that's because we're very secular.

ComradeSeraphim posted...

https://youtu.be/npuuTBlEb1U

No, I was referring to the comic. I also played that game in 1999.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

I don't get it.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Blightzkrieg posted...

Wow, this post is like a flashback to my brony days, 10/10 very nostalgic

I've only watched the first episode of MLP, just to see what the fuss was all about. Anyway, don't think I've never dated a girl before. It's just that I'm no good at hitting on strangers. I usually get to know a girl more before asking her out. Since the pandemic started however, I didn't meet a single girl I could ask out. I rarely leave the house and don't socialize anymore. I had just started hanging out in a community center a few weeks before the pandemic and there was this older girl I found interesting. By older, I mean she looked at least 5 years older than me. I only got to meet her once, but I was hoping to see her a few more times before asking her out. Then the pandemic happened and the center closed indefinitely.

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec

Man, if I was the man doing this video and receiving that letter at the end, right after reading it I would have ran up to that girl and ask her on a date. To be this kind and generous in such a shithole town is so rare. She's a pearl in an ocean of dung. I'm extremely shy when it comes to dating, but this right there would have given me the courage to ask and not care about the answer. Had she denied my request, I would still ask her to be my friend at the very least. I would definitely want to hang out with people like her, especially if I was living in such a horrid place. Good people have to stick together. Seriously, this girl's a real treasure.

Blightzkrieg posted...

I'm sure if BLM changed the name of their movement to something less insulting these people would be firm supporters. It's a shame that the blacks insist on constant self sabotage

Do you think that black lives matter? Answering yes =/= white lives don't matter. Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you?

---

I'm French speaking.
30/Male/Quebec