ragreynolds

Tyrant
  • Content count

    859
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    50

Everything posted by ragreynolds

  1. I'm against capital punishment. There are far too many instances of people being killed and then it coming to light that they were actually innocent. I also think it's a dumb idea to punish a killer by killing them. That makes you just as bad. I think people should be allowed to commit suicide if they want to. However, if someone is in prison I do not think they should be allowed to, since that would be then trying to escape punishment. Prison needs to be harsher, and luxuries such as Television need to be eliminated. They also shouldn't have much of a chance to form social groups, because prison gangs and crime is another huge issue.
  2. This is where I'm gonna dump videos I make for my "Worse Than a Child Molester?" series. Feel free to give me valuable feedback/advice or whatever. Try to enjoy them, also feel free to make requests. Keemstar Onision Billie Dawn Ingle Shoe0nHead LeafyIsHere Eugenia Cooney Filthy Frank Vegan Gains Blaire White
  3. you need to be stopped
  4. As the title says.
  5. https://heatst.com/culture-wars/scottish-youtuber-faces-a-year-in-prison-for-teaching-nazi-trick-to-girlfriends-dog/ Basically, this Scottish YouTuber made a comedic video where his dog was watching Nazi propaganda and he taught it to do a Nazi salute. Apparently, some Jewish group found the video and reported him to the police and he got arrested. Now he's facing a year in prison and is thinking of applying for asylum in the US if things go badly. Fucking insane.
  6. What movies do you wish would get sequels?
  7. I was around 5'10" at that time.
  8. I was 75KG with 12% body fat when I was 13/14. MANLET WEIGHT
  9. 70KG? That's manlet size.
  10. This was originally a chapter taken from my new upcoming book, so you can just read it instead: How soon is too soon? When is it okay to start cracking jokes? How far is too far? When does a joke stop being a joke? Well, I say that there is neither such a thing as too soon, or too far. When tragedy strikes, people understandably tend to get very emotional. People deal with said tragedy in all sorts of ways. Some people deal with it by crying, others by showing respect to the dead. But there are others who deal with tragedy through humour. Now to most people, nothing is more distasteful and disrespectful than making jokes at the expense of the victims of a recent tragedy. Some people feel that way even regarding tragedies that are long behind us. That is perfectly okay. You are allowed to feel that way, and you are allowed to say that you feel that way. However, what you should not be saying is that other people should not be allowed to make those certain jokes. Who are you to determine what is or is not an acceptable way to mourn? If I got cancer, I would be the first person to make a joke about me having cancer. Humour is how I deal with horrible things, and the same is true for many others. If a loved one of mine died in a terror attack or some other tragedy, then sure, perhaps I would not be making those jokes right away about that particular event. However, I would not be telling anyone else that they cannot tell those jokes. I understand why people tell these sorts of jokes. I accept it. There is a tremendous difference between simply cracking a joke about a serious horrific event, and telling those jokes directly to someone that has suffered a loss from that horrific event. All things can and should be joked about. I always say that you should either joke about everything or joke about nothing. Humour has no limits. The jokes that upset one person are not the jokes that upset another. Everyone has a different idea of what should and should not be acceptable. One person might be deeply hurt by jokes about cancer, but they could find jokes pertaining to the tragedy that was the Holocaust to be profoundly amusing. Meanwhile, another person could find cancer jokes to be hilarious but is overwhelmingly crushed by jokes about the Holocaust. So who is right? Both of them are. Neither of them is wrong to be upset by certain jokes. You cannot control what upsets you. You can, however, control how you react to the emotions you feel due to those jokes. You can control whether or not you lash out at the people telling those jokes, or whether you just accept the fact that other people have different tolerances than you do, and that perhaps they just deal with certain things in a different way. Who are you to take away the thing that is shining light into their lives? No one is horrible for telling a joke that you deem to be distasteful. What makes someone horrible for telling a joke is not what the joke actually is, but rather the circumstances under which the joke was told. Telling a joke in a comedy club, on your social media account, or in the comfort of your own home, is perfectly okay. Telling that same joke at a memorial site, directing it at someone on social media, or standing outside of your neighbour's house, is likely not okay. Everything can be joked about, and everything should be joked about. Jokes help to lighten times of darkness, they help people get through tough times. You don't need to join in with the jokes, but you do need to accept that other people have the right to tell them. You are not of a higher moral standard just because you refrain from telling certain types of jokes.
  11. I finally just finished the first 3 Mass Effect games. I got all of them free with EA Access on Xbox One, so I've been playing them all over the past few months, and last night I finished the third game. The first game I found to be very tedious, mainly due to how bad and glitchy the combat was. I know everyone says that 2 is better than 3, but I think I actually enjoyed them about an equal amount. I feel like the better combat/gameplay of 3 makes up for what else it is lacking. However, I was disappointed with a lot of Mass Effect 3, because it felt like it kept giving me the illusion of choice rather than actual meaningful choices. Example: I felt like I made a bunch of those sort of choices throughout the game, and I enjoyed making them at the time. I kept thinking they'd be impactful, but that's why when I hit the end stretch I was left feeling disappointed because those choices I made earlier didn't actually mean as much as I thought they did. So I guess I'd say 2 is a better game, but the improved combat in 3 made it equally as enjoyable for me. I'm not sure if I'm gonna play Andromeda anytime soon.
  12. The point isn't whether or not I or you personally find it funny. The point is that some people do, and it does not make those people immoral to find those jokes funny. You not laughing at those jokes does not make you a better person than them. That's the point I'm making. And often times it's entire to do with how people cope with the tragedy. You deal with it through anger, they deal with it through humour.
  13. yuck
  14. How would you compare it to the first 3 games?
  15. Jokes are fine, but Onision's behaviour is not. He's clearly just trying to get attention from this by being edgy, kinda like he always has done with these situations in the past. He thinks he's being 'brutally honest' but in reality, he's really just acting like an autistic edge lord desperate for attention. He's just a fucking idiot.
  16. Of course, there should be repercussions to saying stupid and hateful things, but those consequences should be entirely social and dealt out by your peers, never by the legal system. That's what makes free speech free speech. It's the fact you can say anything you want, and then people can react to that in anyway that they want. Do you want to say Jews deserved to die in the Holocaust? Feel free to say so, but everyone that knows you is also free to call you a piece of shit and never talk to you again. But it's certainly not a matter for the police to be involved in. I keep saying to people, and I've written a whole chapter about this in my new book, the police came into existence for one reason, and was to stop bad people hurting good people. Somewhere along the line, it became the duty of the police to also protect people from themselves and to protect people from things they don't need protecting from. The police are there to stop murderers and thieves. They are there to stop people who are out to get you and harm your wellbeing. Being offended by what someone says, no matter how hateful or horrible that may be, is not something that is actually harming you, and it is not something that the police need to protect you from. However, threats of violence? Constant unwanted harassment? These are things that the police are there to protect you from. A threat is intent to make something non-harmful into something actually harmful, and that is something that must be dealt with. And as for harassment, it's not what a person says that makes something harassment, it's the act of actively saying things to them when you know for a fact that they don't want you to say those things/say anything to them. And I'm not too familiar with the specific hate speech laws in the UK. It is entirely possible that Scotland does have actual stricter laws on top of the general UK laws, but from what I've read recently it just seems that Scotland is just more PC in general for some reason. But that actually surprises me because I'd have thought Scotland would be the least PC nation in the UK (aside from maybe Northern Ireland).
  17. Well yeah, the whole point of this thread is that him being put in prison is absurd. It almost worries me to an extent because my YouTube channel has a lot of 'distasteful' and potentially 'hateful' content on it. This guy only has 32K subs, probably was less when this all kicked off, so he's small. Not as small of a channel as mine, but we're both still small. I have various videos claiming Australians are all retards, videos saying that Brazilians are dummies, videos comparing various groups of people to child molesters, etc... so although I don't really have anything Nazi related (other than supporting Evalion's right to speak) I have a lot of content that I'm sure various people would like to have me arrested for too.
  18. Yeah, I understand why these laws are in place, I just don't agree with them in the slightest. You cannot have a hate speech law in place that will account for jokes as well. Humour is subjective, and people could easily turn to using the excuse of "It was just a joke, I wasn't actually preaching for everyone to kill the Jews". The problem is that there are people who think that certain types of humour shouldn't be allowed. Maybe you don't like cancer jokes, but that doesn't mean the rest of the country shouldn't be allowed to tell them and laugh about them. Same goes for the likes of Holocaust jokes and 9/11 jokes. There should never be laws prohibiting hate speech, simply because everyone has a different idea of what hate speech is, and everyone has a different idea of what is and is not acceptable. There's a difference between actually threatening someone and telling other people to harass someone because they're black, or just saying that black people are all nasty and should fuck off. Everyone should be allowed to voice their opinions and say whatever they want, no matter how horrible or stupid that may be. What people should not be allowed to do is directly call for harm to come to someone else. "I hate all black people and they should fuck off back to Africa" - racist and disgusting, but should be allowed. "I hate all black people and you should get a bunch of your friends together on Saturday night and beat the shit out of that nigger who lives next door to you" - should not be allowed. The difference between those two statements being that one was simply a hateful opinion being voiced, whereas the other was a direct call to harm someone because of that hateful opinion. The best way to deal with racists and the like is always to let them speak. Let them speak and everyone will see how dumb and disgusting they are. If you do not let them speak, they will gather discreetly and their ideas will brew in the dark until suddenly you realise that there are far more of these people than you thought. Censorship of any speech, no matter how bad it is, is never a good thing. And that's what hate speech laws are; censorship of speech and ideas.
  19. Separate laws and legal system for certain issues. Overall we are still governed by the UK, and in the UK we have strict hate speech laws, meaning that we do not have true free speech. That isn't just Scotland, that's the entire UK.
  20. This actually has nothing to do with the SNP. The UK, in general, have these exact same laws prohibiting hate speech. In the UK we do not have true free speech. It's just that for whatever reason, the police/legal system are more intolerant of so-called 'hate speech' in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK.