92 year old WWII vet bootlegs 300,000 DVDs and sends them to American soldiers in Afghanastan

[Thyunda]

snip

Now you have GOT to be doing this deliberately. Why SHOULDN'T soldiers have that privilege? They could be dead the next day, they've more a right to luxuries than we easy-living civilians have! But hey, maybe we should just...let people live out their days in misery just because they're not in the right place to enjoy what we have.

Also. That man. He is the old man from Up.

 

[Thyunda]

snip

Now you have GOT to be doing this deliberately. Why SHOULDN'T soldiers have that privilege? They could be dead the next day, they've more a right to luxuries than we easy-living civilians have! But hey, maybe we should just...let people live out their days in misery just because they're not in the right place to enjoy what we have.

Also. That man. He is the old man from Up.

That was an odd post to quote since it was just me replying to someone who had nothing substantive to say at that point.

Anyway, they shouldn't have the privilege since no one should have the privilege of being above the law. Or having their benefactors be above the law as would be the most accurate description in this case. I'm not about slavish adherence to the law for the law's sake or anything, but unless there's a flaw with the law itself that is relevant to this I do not think that anyone should be put above the law here. Especially not for service to the government, that corrupts the whole thing.

And no, they have no more right to luxuries than anyone else for their choice. Was it part of their deal when signing up? No? Then they cannot expect it.

And I don't mind letting people live out their days in misery because they chose to do so. To expect more after they made said choice would be quite entitled.

They didn't expect more. It was a nice thing for a veteran to do - he'd been through it and he knew what would have made it easier for him, so he offered to make it easier for them. And they appreciated it. While yes, we do need to...SHOW that he has been punished, I really don't think he actually deserves punishment. There's just...nothing to punish.

 

[monkey_man]

Consider the following: No soldiers, no soldiers going to war, no war. It's an easy solution to a stupid problem, and I'm frankly disappointed that we still GO to war. We're HUMANS! the smartest being on this planet, and we still resort to stupid things.

Anyway, the above thing explains why I don't think
A: the soldiers should have gotten the discs
B: the war-vet deserves no special treatment than any other lawbreaker
C: this thread has any value really, besides the usual: "soldiers, good or bad?" and "pirating: good or bad?" threads

Bloobity bluh, I think the old man should go to jail like any other lawbreaker. Or caught pirate really. I don't give a toss whether you're a pirate or not, if you get caught, the consequences are yours.

 

[Thyunda]

snip

Now you have GOT to be doing this deliberately. Why SHOULDN'T soldiers have that privilege? They could be dead the next day, they've more a right to luxuries than we easy-living civilians have! But hey, maybe we should just...let people live out their days in misery just because they're not in the right place to enjoy what we have.

Also. That man. He is the old man from Up.

That was an odd post to quote since it was just me replying to someone who had nothing substantive to say at that point.

Anyway, they shouldn't have the privilege since no one should have the privilege of being above the law. Or having their benefactors be above the law as would be the most accurate description in this case. I'm not about slavish adherence to the law for the law's sake or anything, but unless there's a flaw with the law itself that is relevant to this I do not think that anyone should be put above the law here. Especially not for service to the government, that corrupts the whole thing.

And no, they have no more right to luxuries than anyone else for their choice. Was it part of their deal when signing up? No? Then they cannot expect it.

And I don't mind letting people live out their days in misery because they chose to do so. To expect more after they made said choice would be quite entitled.

They didn't expect more. It was a nice thing for a veteran to do - he'd been through it and he knew what would have made it easier for him, so he offered to make it easier for them. And they appreciated it. While yes, we do need to...SHOW that he has been punished, I really don't think he actually deserves punishment. There's just...nothing to punish.

He offered with things that were not his own. That was wrong of him and I'll maintain that position unless someone shows me why he'd deserve to be above the law here.

As for punishment, I don't particularly care if he's punished of not, he's kind of old for it. At worst something to stop him from reoffending should be done.

If he received any gain from this, I'd be on your side. But he really didn't. Benevolent piracy, eh? I'd make an exception. He took no credit, he didn't become a name, they were just mystery packages appearing.
And as for reoffending...bah. If he doesn't reoffend in the next five years I don't think we have anything to worry about.


Also I quoted that post because it was the closest one to the bottom. I don't like quoting ones from before.

 

[loc978]

Oh good, maybe this will outline just how wrong and exploitative Hollywood's current distribution practices are. I honestly hope they go after him and get destroyed in the process just for more public coverage.

 

[Thyunda]

snip

Now you have GOT to be doing this deliberately. Why SHOULDN'T soldiers have that privilege? They could be dead the next day, they've more a right to luxuries than we easy-living civilians have! But hey, maybe we should just...let people live out their days in misery just because they're not in the right place to enjoy what we have.

Also. That man. He is the old man from Up.

That was an odd post to quote since it was just me replying to someone who had nothing substantive to say at that point.

Anyway, they shouldn't have the privilege since no one should have the privilege of being above the law. Or having their benefactors be above the law as would be the most accurate description in this case. I'm not about slavish adherence to the law for the law's sake or anything, but unless there's a flaw with the law itself that is relevant to this I do not think that anyone should be put above the law here. Especially not for service to the government, that corrupts the whole thing.

And no, they have no more right to luxuries than anyone else for their choice. Was it part of their deal when signing up? No? Then they cannot expect it.

And I don't mind letting people live out their days in misery because they chose to do so. To expect more after they made said choice would be quite entitled.

They didn't expect more. It was a nice thing for a veteran to do - he'd been through it and he knew what would have made it easier for him, so he offered to make it easier for them. And they appreciated it. While yes, we do need to...SHOW that he has been punished, I really don't think he actually deserves punishment. There's just...nothing to punish.

He offered with things that were not his own. That was wrong of him and I'll maintain that position unless someone shows me why he'd deserve to be above the law here.

As for punishment, I don't particularly care if he's punished of not, he's kind of old for it. At worst something to stop him from reoffending should be done.

If he received any gain from this, I'd be on your side. But he really didn't. Benevolent piracy, eh? I'd make an exception. He took no credit, he didn't become a name, they were just mystery packages appearing.
And as for reoffending...bah. If he doesn't reoffend in the next five years I don't think we have anything to worry about.

But why should his lack of gain matter? So piracy is now okay if we start gifting to random people we don't know instead of benefiting from it ourselves?

Well yes, but he could easily do so in the next 5 years.

Also I quoted that post because it was the closest one to the bottom. I don't like quoting ones from before.

It makes it unclear what particular things you were taking issue with was all.

I cut the text out for that reason. I just wanted you to know your best friend wanted a friendly hug.

And yeah kinda. I mean, stealing food to give to the homeless. Robbing the rich to feed the poor. It's all well and good when we're talking about rebels in far off countries or Robin Hood in far-off times, but soon as it happens around us, we all close up and declare them criminals. More people should be so community spirited.

 

[Iron Criterion]

I don't see why people think soldiers deserve such special treatment. They get paid over there, they aren't saints or something. And being a WWII veteran doesn't really give him leave to break the law.

Watch out we have a bad-ass over here...

I agree you don't have to respect a solider just because they're a solider. But you should have respect for a WWII vet, simply because without them you wouldn't be able to post your first world problems all over the internet.

I'm willing to wager you've done nothing remotely noble or interesting with your life? (And no I haven't either).

 

[Thyunda]

snip

Now you have GOT to be doing this deliberately. Why SHOULDN'T soldiers have that privilege? They could be dead the next day, they've more a right to luxuries than we easy-living civilians have! But hey, maybe we should just...let people live out their days in misery just because they're not in the right place to enjoy what we have.

Also. That man. He is the old man from Up.

That was an odd post to quote since it was just me replying to someone who had nothing substantive to say at that point.

Anyway, they shouldn't have the privilege since no one should have the privilege of being above the law. Or having their benefactors be above the law as would be the most accurate description in this case. I'm not about slavish adherence to the law for the law's sake or anything, but unless there's a flaw with the law itself that is relevant to this I do not think that anyone should be put above the law here. Especially not for service to the government, that corrupts the whole thing.

And no, they have no more right to luxuries than anyone else for their choice. Was it part of their deal when signing up? No? Then they cannot expect it.

And I don't mind letting people live out their days in misery because they chose to do so. To expect more after they made said choice would be quite entitled.

They didn't expect more. It was a nice thing for a veteran to do - he'd been through it and he knew what would have made it easier for him, so he offered to make it easier for them. And they appreciated it. While yes, we do need to...SHOW that he has been punished, I really don't think he actually deserves punishment. There's just...nothing to punish.

He offered with things that were not his own. That was wrong of him and I'll maintain that position unless someone shows me why he'd deserve to be above the law here.

As for punishment, I don't particularly care if he's punished of not, he's kind of old for it. At worst something to stop him from reoffending should be done.

If he received any gain from this, I'd be on your side. But he really didn't. Benevolent piracy, eh? I'd make an exception. He took no credit, he didn't become a name, they were just mystery packages appearing.
And as for reoffending...bah. If he doesn't reoffend in the next five years I don't think we have anything to worry about.

But why should his lack of gain matter? So piracy is now okay if we start gifting to random people we don't know instead of benefiting from it ourselves?

Well yes, but he could easily do so in the next 5 years.

Also I quoted that post because it was the closest one to the bottom. I don't like quoting ones from before.

It makes it unclear what particular things you were taking issue with was all.

I cut the text out for that reason. I just wanted you to know your best friend wanted a friendly hug.

Ah okay -__-

And yeah kinda. I mean, stealing food to give to the homeless. Robbing the rich to feed the poor. It's all well and good when we're talking about rebels in far off countries or Robin Hood in far-off times, but soon as it happens around us, we all close up and declare them criminals. More people should be so community spirited.

Robin Hood took from the unjust to the people they were victimizing. I'm not seeing how the MPAA is responsible for the state of Afghanistan and the soldiers' lives over there.

And note, feeding the poor is giving them something they need to survive.

This guy is handing out free entertainment, breaking laws in a manner that acts against people who didn't do anything wrong to the soldiers in Afghanistan.

Entertainment is as important as anything else. Otherwise your mind gets all dead.

 

[Tsaba]

I love the hypocrisy up in this thread. Almost everybody has just advocated piracy.

Whats funny is.... pirated made in the USA or pirated made in the Middle East....

decisions decisions...

OT: Great Guy, not sure that this is the best way of supporting the troops though....

 

[Thyunda]

snip

Now you have GOT to be doing this deliberately. Why SHOULDN'T soldiers have that privilege? They could be dead the next day, they've more a right to luxuries than we easy-living civilians have! But hey, maybe we should just...let people live out their days in misery just because they're not in the right place to enjoy what we have.

Also. That man. He is the old man from Up.

That was an odd post to quote since it was just me replying to someone who had nothing substantive to say at that point.

Anyway, they shouldn't have the privilege since no one should have the privilege of being above the law. Or having their benefactors be above the law as would be the most accurate description in this case. I'm not about slavish adherence to the law for the law's sake or anything, but unless there's a flaw with the law itself that is relevant to this I do not think that anyone should be put above the law here. Especially not for service to the government, that corrupts the whole thing.

And no, they have no more right to luxuries than anyone else for their choice. Was it part of their deal when signing up? No? Then they cannot expect it.

And I don't mind letting people live out their days in misery because they chose to do so. To expect more after they made said choice would be quite entitled.

They didn't expect more. It was a nice thing for a veteran to do - he'd been through it and he knew what would have made it easier for him, so he offered to make it easier for them. And they appreciated it. While yes, we do need to...SHOW that he has been punished, I really don't think he actually deserves punishment. There's just...nothing to punish.

He offered with things that were not his own. That was wrong of him and I'll maintain that position unless someone shows me why he'd deserve to be above the law here.

As for punishment, I don't particularly care if he's punished of not, he's kind of old for it. At worst something to stop him from reoffending should be done.

If he received any gain from this, I'd be on your side. But he really didn't. Benevolent piracy, eh? I'd make an exception. He took no credit, he didn't become a name, they were just mystery packages appearing.
And as for reoffending...bah. If he doesn't reoffend in the next five years I don't think we have anything to worry about.

But why should his lack of gain matter? So piracy is now okay if we start gifting to random people we don't know instead of benefiting from it ourselves?

Well yes, but he could easily do so in the next 5 years.

Also I quoted that post because it was the closest one to the bottom. I don't like quoting ones from before.

It makes it unclear what particular things you were taking issue with was all.

I cut the text out for that reason. I just wanted you to know your best friend wanted a friendly hug.

Ah okay -__-

And yeah kinda. I mean, stealing food to give to the homeless. Robbing the rich to feed the poor. It's all well and good when we're talking about rebels in far off countries or Robin Hood in far-off times, but soon as it happens around us, we all close up and declare them criminals. More people should be so community spirited.

Robin Hood took from the unjust to the people they were victimizing. I'm not seeing how the MPAA is responsible for the state of Afghanistan and the soldiers' lives over there.

And note, feeding the poor is giving them something they need to survive.

This guy is handing out free entertainment, breaking laws in a manner that acts against people who didn't do anything wrong to the soldiers in Afghanistan.

Entertainment is as important as anything else. Otherwise your mind gets all dead.

We've survived for a pretty long time without this particular entertainment, so no excuse there really.

I do apologise for that last post, apparently my brain decided 'gets all dead' was a technical term.
But really, why deny them that entertainment? There's no real reason for it. They can't exactly come back here, pay for the DVDs legitimately and then watch them there. Happy soldiers are effective soldiers. Really the MPAA should be glad of the service done for their country.