What's your controversial opinion?

Recommended Videos

RanD00M

New member
Oct 26, 2008
6,946
0
0
I think that all people that are either physically or mentally unable to ever work a day in their lives should just be gotten rid of. They do nothing to condone to society and just leech tax money.
 

RanD00M

New member
Oct 26, 2008
6,946
0
0
Jack the Potato said:
UFOROMANTIC said:
I would willingly consume human flesh it was served to me in a way that was palatable.
Don't eat the brain. That's how cows get mad cow disease. You'd get mad man disease!
He become a hot shot advertising agent with a hot wife? Count me in!
 

Lord Beautiful

New member
Aug 13, 2008
5,939
0
0
Jack the Potato said:
Female comedians aren't funny, and women's basketball is really, really boring.
Sir, this is a thread about opinions. Not facts.

My controversial opinion is that hitting a woman should be just as socially acceptable as hitting a man. Then again, that may not be controversial. I dunno.
 

MikailCaboose

New member
Jun 16, 2009
1,246
0
0
TheDarkEricDraven said:
The Lesbian Flower said:
I believe that every single thing in this world should be free (food, clothes, cars, medical care, houses, etc...), we should do away with money, and have all people on the planet work for no pay (well, all the free stuff would kind of be pay).

As a child I always thought that this solution would solve all issues human beings could ever face.
...Like the Federation in Star Trek?
The Federation wasn't quite like that I think. From what I understand, not everything was free. Instead, you earned certain things from the merits of your abilities and what you do, thus keeping a sense of motivation.

Plus, the Federation included the Ferengis, and they had their own monetary system that was universally used as well.
 

MikailCaboose

New member
Jun 16, 2009
1,246
0
0
BabyRaptor said:
Not G. Ivingname said:
Mine: More guns make everybody safer. Study after study after study has found higher gun owning areas have lower crime rates since criminals are more scared of the common person rather then the cops that on average take 30 minutes to respond to a call.

I also like My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic.
I agree with your basic idea, but I think the Second Amendment is grossly over-hyped. For example, did you hear about the recent law that Florida passed, stating that it's a violation of a person's Second Amendment rights if a doctor asks them if there is a gun in their house?

Leaving aside the mind-melting question of "How, exactly, is a doctor asking you if you own a gun violating your right that says the government can't stop you from owning a musket?"...Does anyone else see the major issue? The next time a patient shows up in the ER with a gunshot wound, the doctor won't be able to ask how he got the injury for fear of hearing "I accidentally shot myself" or some variant, and then he'll have violated the law. And I'm betting dollars to donuts that law won't protect any doctor being sued for malpractice after having messed up due to not being able to get accurate information.

Sorry, I ranted.
Uhm, how does knowing if a gun is present in the house have any bearing on the doctor's ability to treat the wound? If I'm correct, it's not the doctor's job to find out just how something like that occurred, as whether or not you shot yourself or a random person on the street shot you, does not change the fact that you now have a bleeding hole in the arm. Nor does it change how the doctor would go about treating it.
 

Shio

New member
Jun 4, 2011
385
0
0
RanD00M said:
They do nothing to condone to society and just leech tax money.
Firstly, that makes no sense; it reads as "they do nothing to accept or approve to society and just leech tax money."

Secondly, I think you mean to say "they do nothing for me." I'm certain the handicap have friends and loved ones who cherish their very existence, and what is life if not the pursuit of happiness? I'm willing to bet also that the handicap can bring more good to the world and those in it, than can people filled with hate and eugenical ideals, bred from some misguided sense of superiority that exists perhaps as a defense from inward looking and upsetting realizations of actual inferiority. I'd be hard pressed to find an individual who would rather spend time with the latter.
 

Shio

New member
Jun 4, 2011
385
0
0
Not G. Ivingname said:
Mine: More guns make everybody safer. Study after study after study has found higher gun owning areas have lower crime rates since criminals are more scared of the common person rather then the cops that on average take 30 minutes to respond to a call.

I also like My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic.
"[On gun crime] In England and Wales (the most populous part of the United Kingdom) the rate is below the EU average, about four times lower than that of the United States but on almost the same level as in Canada." - [sup]ref [http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2001/life_of_crime/police.stm][/sup]

No guns = no gun crime.
 

Not G. Ivingname

New member
Nov 18, 2009
6,367
0
0
Shio said:
Not G. Ivingname said:
Mine: More guns make everybody safer. Study after study after study has found higher gun owning areas have lower crime rates since criminals are more scared of the common person rather then the cops that on average take 30 minutes to respond to a call.

I also like My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic.
"[On gun crime] In England and Wales (the most populous part of the United Kingdom) the rate is below the EU average, about four times lower than that of the United States but on almost the same level as in Canada." - [sup]ref [http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2001/life_of_crime/police.stm][/sup]

No guns = no gun crime.
Being on sea locked island were it much harder for illegal guns to be brought in = no gun crime.
 

Shio

New member
Jun 4, 2011
385
0
0
Not G. Ivingname said:
Shio said:
Not G. Ivingname said:
Mine: More guns make everybody safer. Study after study after study has found higher gun owning areas have lower crime rates since criminals are more scared of the common person rather then the cops that on average take 30 minutes to respond to a call.

I also like My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic.
"[On gun crime] In England and Wales (the most populous part of the United Kingdom) the rate is below the EU average, about four times lower than that of the United States but on almost the same level as in Canada." - [sup]ref [http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2001/life_of_crime/police.stm][/sup]

No guns = no gun crime.
Being on sea locked island were it much harder for illegal guns to be brought in = no gun crime.
So your assertion of "higher gun owning areas have lower crime rates" seems incorrect. Could you provide any sources or references? Or is this just an idea you have?

As an aside:

"England, where no one has guns: 14 deaths. United States, and I think you know how we feel about guns - whoo! I'm gettin' a stiffy! - 23,000 deaths from handguns. But there's no connection, and you'd be a fool and a comunist to make one. There's no connection between having a gun and shooting someone with it, and not having a gun and not shooting someone." - Bill Hicks.
 

triggrhappy94

New member
Apr 24, 2010
3,373
0
0
Women...
Congrads, you guys did it! You have equality. Now you can stop, because now it becoming more about getting more then men.
Cannibolism...
I don't think cannibolism is that bad. Killing people is bad, but eating people doesn't seem that bad. I don't think there's any case where anyone can justify butchering someone, but the act of eating human meat doesn't seem bad.
Devout Religious People (preticularly christians)...
You're ruining this country (America). Your believes have no place in politics. And don't get me started on your censorship.
Celebrities...
Why does old washed up actors get off with house arrests, when any normal person would be in jail for life.
 

GraveeKing

New member
Nov 15, 2009
621
0
0
I'm not going to read over all the religion hate here and how they obviously hold back humanity.
And I DEFINITELY won't go off topic on crap like how I have a Christian friend who goes to church, carry's a bible, doesn't believe in evolution in the slightest, but is still going to college - and university soon in the major sciences to become a scientist. I would also certainly not mention that, it would seem to me, despite a lot of idiots who are overly religious to the point where are from the medieval age the actual factor holding anything back is down to plain old boring morality - nothing to do with religion, people just point out religion as a pathetic excuse to make themselves feel better.

ANYWAYS back onto my intended topic.
Oh America, there are plenty of hateful points I could make about the country, but since I may as well start off right for the most obvious, I'll get right into it.
America is the most corrupt and violent country I know of to date, some how it gets away with wars which are based on corruption, stupidity and the most obvious -oil- they get into wars which have nothing to do with them and they should just keep out of! And only the most stupid seem to realize that it was all for no good reason other than to play the big ol' hero who saves the day.

I must confess, I don't know the details of every war they've been involved in - I mean i hate the country, why the hell would I WANT to know details? but I thought I'd go into one that probably isn't mentioned enough.
Their war with the Great plain Indian tribes.
In truth, there was no excuse for what happened (a complete destruction of their culture) other than to expand land for greed - and this considering that the great plains lands were terribly hard to farm mostly at the time, requiring a lot of equipment to get anything out of, so the land was near useless to them anyway! And that's not considering the huge amounts of land available to them to the east and west!
So it's a war over land you may say - what's so bad about that, a hell of a lot of country's are guilty of that. Well, let me explain how they did it, and maybe you can understand how I managed to develop even more hatred for them while I was doing my GCSE. To put it simply, the Indian tribes were not the most organized - they were separate tribes after all, moving about to follow the buffalo herd to eat, so seeing weakness they used what were referred to as 'total war' tactics, as in a total war on more than the people - the culture itself. They began slaughtering the buffalo, shooting them dead from the tops of trains so they couldn't eat, taking away Indian children from their 'designated zones' where they were made to live, and putting them into schools to try and turn them to what they define as 'normal', that being - Christian, Farmer of lands rather than a hunter and so on.
Basically, they killed anyone who argued, kidnapped children to try and turn them to their side and slaughtered animals by numbers I don't even want to consider - just to starve them as well - all just to destroy the culture. Big old 'hero' my ass....

I think I've lectured on enough about that and I don't need a giant wall of text for people to sift through so you can research anything more for yourself.


Onto a second thing. Their part in WW2.... Now before I start, I do not support nazism or every detail of Germany's rampage across Europe+ BUT it was still our war. So please bare with me while reading onwards.

As we probably all know, America helped out during WW2 greatly, if Germany had chosen to focus down just England, France and the rest and left Russia for later, they'd have been a lot better off and had a much better chance. anyways, my point is here is that - despite all their so called 'evil' actions, the German people were not people who deserved to be slaughtered - wasn't that what we were trying to do? to STOP during the holocaust?
Now you may tell me 'what do you mean slaughtering them?' And I would reply: the bombing of Germany. Not enough people realize, American bombers, wrecked through Germany after they'd more or less already lost (although not surrendered admittedly) so you may say - well they did it to England - serves them right! I would care for you to search up what exactly kind of destruction I'm talking about here. Germany didn't have air defense against those kind of heavy bombers - the civilians were defenseless and in fact, there are many reports that can even prove that Germany lost more civilians to those bombings than England ever lost. So in short, America stormed over Germany with bombers - just to prove their point after Germany's army had been nearly totally destroyed.
I can then refer to the nuking of Japan - again - down to America and you may start to understand when I say 'yes they didn't surrender but so what? They've already lost - you're meant to be the so called 'good guys' defending yourselves! Nuking Japan was ONE of the most horrific and evil things in WW2 in my single opinion, they were defenseless to them after they'd already lost and were the desperate to the point of suicide bombing themselves into the ships to stop them.


Now with the old over-used 'history' card played, I think it's time I got to my final point. Modern America as it is today:
It hasn't improved in the slightest, if anything it's gotten worse.
I won't pretend my own country is any better in this day and age, but America has a hell of a lot of statistics that are under-read you lot should probably know about. For example perhaps, just over 1% of their population is in Prison. That's how desperate some people become there - but that's not all, you may not understand their system. The concept of '3 strikes then you're out' or basically on the 3rd time - you're in for life.
Even if it's just stealing 3 or 4 cookies from a shop. That offense would get you life, if you've done 2 other offenses (which you've served time for no less, and maybe even changed from). Again as I said before, I don't know the details: But the point still stands and before I leave the subject - these people in prison are only there for 1 reason: 'slavery by the back door' I do quote from a certain panel show that most reading people probably know about (QI).
As you probably know, you can work in prison for a tiny payment, making license plates being the stereotypical one but it can be anything that requires no skill. What you may not know - is it's not a choice, if they refuse they get punished, put into solitary, losing privileges etc, so more or less they're saying work or your life is going to be even more miserable. And yes I know they're criminals but these are still people, some of whom as mentioned above may not even deserve to be there!

But enough about that topic, let's go onto a fun one! Health care. Not the best on the details with this one, but to put it simply - you don't control whether you can afford health care. A company out to make money does, I.E insurance company's. You have something wrong with you? You got to them and they give you the money to pay for it! In the mean time you pay them money when you're not sick. Seems like a pretty simple system right? You know, like taxes for health care over here! :D
No. It doesn't work like that, this isn't that situation in the slightest, these insurance company's are only out to make money, many looking into your past to find an excuse that proves you lied about one thing or another (or simply forgot to mention at the time due to it's insignificance) they will not give you money, and you will stay ill.
Now let's also not forget that this means hospitals and health care become a business!! Peoples lives, well being and health - only there to make money! It's things like this that utterly and totally disgust me - you can't get more corrupt than peoples illness making you money, and if they don't have money - you stay ill. Simple.


I think I'll make my final point quick. So called 'freedom of speech'. I would like to refer to the amount of trouble this causes, because to put simply it's not a freedom of speech it's a freedom of terribly wrong ideas that they've tried to stop in the past since they only cause hate and trouble. Let's use a great example: WestBoro Baptist church. You lot probably have heard of them, I won't waste time explaining their views in short: they hate everything. They are nothing less than a cult and if you check their online forums you'll find things that even 4chan would be offended by.
This isn't freedom of speech - it's freedom of hate and stupidity. There are signs like 'god hates America' and other things that really just make you want to head-desk. Of course these ideas aren't the majority in America - far from it. But other ideas - the hating of gays, the idea that you MUST believe in god - they're all a freedom to FORCE people into. I have many many pen pals of mine who can't come out of the closet because their parents would kick them out of their homes 95% of those are American, some even fear for their lives if theysaid anything.
And before you go ahead and blame it on religion, you might want to refer to one of my better friends who is a Catholic and bisexual. The truth is - it is NOT religious problem. It is just utter stupidity that causes America to be a terrible country. A lot of the people there are fine but the a slight majority are just plain and utter idiots....


O.K if you've opened the spoiler prepare for a HUGE - potentially racist - wall of text, most of what I typed up based on what I heard so please feel free to politely correct me on any points I may have got wrong, but most of them are pretty reliable sources.
 

GraveeKing

New member
Nov 15, 2009
621
0
0
triggrhappy94 said:
-snip-
You more or less just spoke my mind, unmoral but it just makes a lot more sense, so thank you for saying all that. Saves me having to write it all up myself.
 

RanD00M

New member
Oct 26, 2008
6,946
0
0
Shio said:
Working against natural selection is what we do by keeping them alive, and as far as I know nature has this thing where it doesn't like us interfering.

Also "what is life if not the pursuit of happiness" if only life were the pursuit of happiness, everything would be a lot simpler then. But that's just some fantasy world thought.
 

DEATHROAD

New member
May 14, 2008
479
0
0
I liked xmen last stand, wolverine, both transformers films and i think the 2nd one is better, i enjoyed the 2nd matrix film, tho the 3rd was a pile of ass, ive never seen the godfather, i like the new indiana jones and i enjoyed the first 3 too, i like shia leboufe acting and while i enjoyed the dark knight, i think its abit over hyped, its good, but not as good as everyone makes out, thouroughly enjoyed dragon age 2, played through 3 times and will buy the dlc on day one.

Ima qualify myself by saying this isnt a trolling attempt, i really did enjoy all of which i said, for the record, i dont just like "bad" films, i just seem to have a higher tollerence for them, most films that are considered good i enjoyed to no end, but alot of films people hated i really enjoyed too, films like scott pilgram and kick-ass sit atop my greatest films of all time list without question, but you will also catch me in line day one when transformers 3 comes out.
 

Shio

New member
Jun 4, 2011
385
0
0
RanD00M said:
Working against natural selection is what we do by keeping them alive, and as far as I know nature has this thing where it doesn't like us interfering.
And the happiness of others is less important than your theory of natural selection, why? Please, refrain from subjective opinion - that's besides the point. If you have some sort of proof to offer, I'd like to see it.
RanD00M said:
Also "what is life if not the pursuit of happiness" if only life were the pursuit of happiness, everything would be a lot simpler then. But that's just some fantasy world thought.
Life is not the pursuit of happiness? Care to prove what it is?

So far as I can see, you've spouted a lot of eugenical nonsense and proven nothing but your own hate.
 

johnnnny guitar

New member
Jul 16, 2010
426
0
0
I think that people that have ADHD get way to much special treatment not so much in trying to learn but when they piss you off or are violent towards you because it's somehow how your fault
 

Not G. Ivingname

New member
Nov 18, 2009
6,367
0
0
Shio said:
Not G. Ivingname said:
Shio said:
Not G. Ivingname said:
Mine: More guns make everybody safer. Study after study after study has found higher gun owning areas have lower crime rates since criminals are more scared of the common person rather then the cops that on average take 30 minutes to respond to a call.

I also like My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic.
"[On gun crime] In England and Wales (the most populous part of the United Kingdom) the rate is below the EU average, about four times lower than that of the United States but on almost the same level as in Canada." - [sup]ref [http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2001/life_of_crime/police.stm][/sup]

No guns = no gun crime.
Being on sea locked island were it much harder for illegal guns to be brought in = no gun crime.
So your assertion of "higher gun owning areas have lower crime rates" seems incorrect. Could you provide any sources or references? Or is this just an idea you have?
Yes, I do. Here are the studies done in the US.

http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/07/pdf/070410.guns.norc.pdf

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st176/

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html

That last one even indicates that Britian's low murder rate already existed before the nation banned handguns in 1998, so it is another reason why the rate of gun crime was so low not related to firearms.
 

Shio

New member
Jun 4, 2011
385
0
0
Not G. Ivingname said:
Shio said:
Not G. Ivingname said:
Shio said:
Not G. Ivingname said:
Mine: More guns make everybody safer. Study after study after study has found higher gun owning areas have lower crime rates since criminals are more scared of the common person rather then the cops that on average take 30 minutes to respond to a call.

I also like My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic.
"[On gun crime] In England and Wales (the most populous part of the United Kingdom) the rate is below the EU average, about four times lower than that of the United States but on almost the same level as in Canada." - [sup]ref [http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2001/life_of_crime/police.stm][/sup]

No guns = no gun crime.
Being on sea locked island were it much harder for illegal guns to be brought in = no gun crime.
So your assertion of "higher gun owning areas have lower crime rates" seems incorrect. Could you provide any sources or references? Or is this just an idea you have?
Yes, I do. Here are the studies done in the US.

http://www-news.uchicago.edu/releases/07/pdf/070410.guns.norc.pdf

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/st176/

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvinco.html

That last one even indicates that Britian's low murder rate already existed before the nation banned handguns in 1998, so it is another reason why the rate of gun crime was so low not related to firearms.
Those links don't demonstrate your opinion very well. In fact, one of them shows the U.S, with the highest percentage of households with guns of all the countries, to have a murder rate some two times that of all other developed countries.

EDIT: grammar error.
 

TerribleAssassin

New member
Apr 11, 2010
2,047
0
0
Don't make music unless you have talent, not lots of money and Cubase's Auto-Tune VST.

Oh, and I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but if you don't embrace others, your no better than a dictator.
 

Not G. Ivingname

New member
Nov 18, 2009
6,367
0
0
Shio said:
Not G. Ivingname said:
Shio said:
Not G. Ivingname said:
Mine: More guns make everybody safer. Study after study after study has found higher gun owning areas have lower crime rates since criminals are more scared of the common person rather then the cops that on average take 30 minutes to respond to a call.

I also like My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic.
"[On gun crime] In England and Wales (the most populous part of the United Kingdom) the rate is below the EU average, about four times lower than that of the United States but on almost the same level as in Canada." - [sup]ref [http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2001/life_of_crime/police.stm][/sup]

No guns = no gun crime.
Being on sea locked island were it much harder for illegal guns to be brought in = no gun crime.
So your assertion of "higher gun owning areas have lower crime rates" seems incorrect. Could you provide any sources or references? Or is this just an idea you have?

As an aside:

"England, where no one has guns: 14 deaths. United States, and I think you know how we feel about guns - whoo! I'm gettin' a stiffy! - 23,000 deaths from handguns. But there's no connection, and you'd be a fool and a comunist to make one. There's no connection between having a gun and shooting someone with it, and not having a gun and not shooting someone." - Bill Hicks.
Alright, how about "semi-automatic rifle owning mandated by law" Switzerland?

http://www.swissgetaway.com/lowcrime.html