• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

ResetEra Discussion -- Stay civil. Don't get personal. Keep it in here.

Status
Not open for further replies.

NOLA_Gaffer

Banned
Diversity is good. What made you think the protesters yesterday were fragile white men?

I'm for gun rights, but the guys that feel the need to "prove themselves" by strapping on their camoflauge gear and toting around their rifles as some sort of show of force is pure intimidation and nothing more. Their message would be have gotten through just as well and would have looked less reactionary to the average laymen if they voiced their opinion and protested without looking like they wanted to start a small war.

Fragile implies that they feel the need to be defensive and cling to their (literal) guns at a moment's notice. I personally feel that they would have appeared a lot more levelheaded and legitimate if they had gone about it another way.

Edit: Especially since the law itself is fairly innocuous if what I saw yesterday summarized is the case. It's an overreaction on the part of that folks that felt the need to participate in the manner that they did.

My comment about "Fragile White Men" was in specific refererence to a video I saw of what (appeared to be) a group of all white men marching through the streets. I was not trying to imply minorities or women weren't in attendance at yesterday's events.
 
Last edited:

#Phonepunk#

Banned
toting around their rifles as some sort of show of force is pure intimidation and nothing more
i mean if there is anywhere that proudly carrying your guns in public would be appropriate it would be.... a pro gun rights protest

lol @ "pure intimidation and nothing more" im guessing from this projection you are doing here that don't live in the US
 
Last edited:

Cybrwzrd

Banned
I'm for gun rights, but the guys that feel the need to "prove themselves" by strapping on their camoflauge gear and toting around their rifles as some sort of show of force is pure intimidation and nothing more. Their message would be have gotten through just as well and would have looked less reactionary to the average laymen if they voiced their opinion and protested without looking like they wanted to start a small war.

Fragile implies that they feel the need to be defensive and cling to their (literal) guns at a moment's notice. I personally feel that they would have appeared a lot more levelheaded and legitimate if they had gone about it another way.

Edit: Especially since the law itself is fairly innocuous if what I saw yesterday summarized is the case. It's an overreaction on the part of that folks that felt the need to participate in the manner that they did.

My comment about "Fragile White Men" was in specific refererence to a video I saw of what (appeared to be) a group of all white men marching through the streets. I was not trying to imply minorities or women weren't in attendance at yesterday's events.

I'm sure the King George would have just let America be free from his rule had the American revolutionaries appeared more "levelheaded and legitimate" without guns, right? Such white male fragility, taking up arms in the name of freedom. They should be like durable non-white men, and take that oppression up the butt.
 
Last edited:

JordanN

Banned
I'm for gun rights, but the guys that feel the need to "prove themselves" by strapping on their camoflauge gear and toting around their rifles as some sort of show of force is pure intimidation and nothing more. Their message would be have gotten through just as well and would have looked less reactionary to the average laymen if they voiced their opinion and protested without looking like they wanted to start a small war.
Sounds absolutely based to me.

I've said this before on Neogaf, but the world should be getting on their hands and knees and thanking god that the second amendment exists.

The fact that Americans could even hold a rally yesterday where citizens of every color, gender, sexuality could march up to their government and literally say "no" is a testament to human rights.

Meanwhile, the second most powerful country on earth does the complete opposite. They have guns pointed at their civllians and are happy to blow their brains out at anytime.

NY8zwE9.jpg


This is what's going to happen if the USA ever falls. I'll take several hundred militias marching with guns in the street, over a single Secret Police.
 
Last edited:

NOLA_Gaffer

Banned
I'm thankful the second amendment exists as well, should it ever come under attack this country is officially fucked.

I'm not one of those "ban guns" idiots.
 
Last edited:
Idk. When I see people carrying their Rifle/Gun to a pro gun event, I see it the same as an LGBTQ Flag at a LGBTQ event. People making their feelings known visually.
 

NOLA_Gaffer

Banned
Idk. When I see people carrying their Rifle/Gun to a pro gun event, I see it the same as an LGBTQ Flag at a LGBTQ event. People making their feelings known visually.

The issue is that a LGBTQ flag isn't threatening anyone but folks that get triggered by such a thing, whereas a gun is an actual lethal threat. I understand the analogy you're attempting to make but it doesn't really work out in the end.
 
Idk. When I see people carrying their Rifle/Gun to a pro gun event, I see it the same as an LGBTQ Flag at a LGBTQ event. People making their feelings known visually.
When I think of pro-gun rallies I remember this lesson from history class:

the-nra-supported-gun-control-when-the-black-panthers-had-the-weaponss-featured-photo.jpg


Some people don't remember their history classes, or they were never taught these events in the first place. What a shame. All that information at our fingertips and people choose to remain ignorant and stand behind dogmatic conclusions.
 
The issue is that a LGBTQ flag isn't threatening anyone but folks that get triggered by such a thing, whereas a gun is an actual lethal threat. I understand the analogy you're attempting to make but it doesn't really work out in the end.
Well what is threatening is largely varies depending on an individuals feelings. Do you think anyone at that rally felt threatened? Even though you had diversity in regards to race and sex. Probably not even though most were strangers to each other.

But anytime a group of people gather and yell their message together, someone can say it’s for the purpose of intimidation.
 
When I think of pro-gun rallies I remember this lesson from history class:

the-nra-supported-gun-control-when-the-black-panthers-had-the-weaponss-featured-photo.jpg


Some people don't remember their history classes, or they were never taught these events in the first place. What a shame. All that information at our fingertips and people choose to remain ignorant and stand behind dogmatic conclusions.
Even coverage from this current event has tried to paint the picture of Redneck Whites and their guns. The further left on coverage the fewer shots of non whites. The further Right, the more non whites are shown.

News with a color slider y’all
 

NOLA_Gaffer

Banned
Even coverage from this current event has tried to paint the picture of Redneck Whites and their guns. The further left on coverage the fewer shots of non whites. The further Right, the more non whites are shown.

News with a color slider y’all

I'll be the first to admit my comment was a reactionary and I shouldn't have made it, but the best I can do is try to explain myself and apologize rather than just delete and run away.
 
Last edited:

jason10mm

Gold Member
So who is Ninja and why does the mere mention of its name get you banned in that "girlfriend slaps boyfriend playing with pokimere" thread? Another example of reeeee kneejerk overreacting on one issue and being unable to admit fault?
 

JordanN

Banned
So who is Ninja and why does the mere mention of its name get you banned in that "girlfriend slaps boyfriend playing with pokimere" thread? Another example of reeeee kneejerk overreacting on one issue and being unable to admit fault?
I think he's the video game streamer who said he didn't want to stream with girls because he's already got a wife?

Reshitera went berserk and now thinks he wants to enslave all women.
 

pulga

Banned
So who is Ninja and why does the mere mention of its name get you banned in that "girlfriend slaps boyfriend playing with pokimere" thread? Another example of reeeee kneejerk overreacting on one issue and being unable to admit fault?
Weird not knowing who Ninja is on a gaming forum but yeah, he's the biggest, highest-paid video game streamer in the world. Dude refused to play with Pokimane and women in general because his wife is the jealous type and he's been #canceled ever since.
 

jason10mm

Gold Member
Weird not knowing who Ninja is on a gaming forum but yeah, he's the biggest, highest-paid video game streamer in the world. Dude refused to play with Pokimane and women in general because his wife is the jealous type and he's been #canceled ever since.

Who has the time for streamers?

Though my 7 year old is addicted to some guy called unspeakable. Guy has the shrillest scream, echos through the house. I hate him :p
 

jason10mm

Gold Member
Same pokimane chick? So the ninja guy was correct? Ie some women can get abusive if their dudes play online with another girl? Will reeee uncancel him? Seems unlikely....
 

Maiden Voyage

Gold™ Member
I'm away from home so I can't volunteer, but somebody ought to comb through that Sanders / Clinton thread and post some highlights.
 

holygeesus

Banned
Sounds absolutely based to me.

I've said this before on Neogaf, but the world should be getting on their hands and knees and thanking god that the second amendment exists.

The fact that Americans could even hold a rally yesterday where citizens of every color, gender, sexuality could march up to their government and literally say "no" is a testament to human rights.

Meanwhile, the second most powerful country on earth does the complete opposite. They have guns pointed at their civllians and are happy to blow their brains out at anytime.

NY8zwE9.jpg


This is what's going to happen if the USA ever falls. I'll take several hundred militias marching with guns in the street, over a single Secret Police.

Do you honestly think a citizen would have a chance against the military and government if it wanted to take you out? They want you subservient otherwise they could squash you like an ant if they so wished, given the disparity in force and weaponry.
 
Do you honestly think a citizen would have a chance against the military and government if it wanted to take you out? They want you subservient otherwise they could squash you like an ant if they so wished, given the disparity in force and weaponry.
Our nation was built by regular citizens, fought and won against a powerful military (British Army)
 

desertdroog

Member
Your pew-pews aint gonna do shit against everything the military has at their disposal nowadays
Supply lines. You can't occupy a country if you can't live in a tank. There are more armed people in the populace than members of the U.S. Armed forces, as well as members of the Armed Forces who will not go with tyranny.

The U.S. is not going to indiscriminately bomb the people they are trying to govern, otherwise there will not be a country to govern, nor are they going to scorch earth the very land they need to exist in as well.
 
Last edited:

Bigrx1

Banned
10. How many genders exist?

I would love to see this question alone get its own thread over there, maybe there is one already? I'm certain that literally every answer would be funny and I wonder if there could even be a clear consensus. My guess is that the majority would lean towards something like "infinite!"
 
Last edited:

JordanN

Banned
Do you honestly think a citizen would have a chance against the military and government if it wanted to take you out?
No one [seriously] believes a gun makes you invincible. But it's a good enough equalizer that makes occupying a nation near impossible.

For the same reason, a gun wont necessarily stop someone from robbing you. But it would make them think twice or lose their life in the process.



Now imagine the same principle on a nation wide scale.
 
Last edited:
I would love to see this question alone get its own thread over there, maybe there is one already? I'm certain that literally every answer would be funny and I wonder if there could even be a clear consensus. My guess is that the majority would lean towards something like "infinite!"
The thread would be like a silent auction...if u bid 2 u get banned but if you go over 100 you win
 

Leprech

Member
Do you honestly think a citizen would have a chance against the military and government if it wanted to take you out? They want you subservient otherwise they could squash you like an ant if they so wished, given the disparity in force and weaponry.
Tell that to the Vietnamese or hell really every grassroots insurrection, muh big weapons are only useful if you dont care about anything but glassing large amounts of people but you need people or you dont have a country and you dont want to glass and wreck your own infrastructure or you dont have a country. Basically you need people on the ground to enforce shit but you are always in the gun minority.
 
Last edited:

Keep believing that, you modern book burning fascists. 🙄🤦‍♀️

Edit: Another one:


Here's the thing: TMS is basically a Persona-game with idols as its core theme. Both are popular in Japan. And it's on a handheld, too! Saying 'nobofy wanted this game' is pure nonsensical deflection, because Resetera refuses to admit the real cause: censorship.

Would it have been a mega seller uncensored? No. But it'd have been a solid 50k FW sales instead of 18k.

And It's not about 'no sexy costumes'. As these people ridiculingly use tbe term 'vagina bones', fact is: Someone at Nintendo Treehouse looked at TMS and went: "Omg, a 17 yo anime girl having hip bone shadows?! That's a big nono! Away with it!". It is *that* attitude and work philosophy I , and apparently many other potential audience members, do NOT want to support. And this games audience was weebs! Those *do* care about stuff like censorship, ya know.

Ofc, there's a lot more censorship than just 1-2 censored costumes, but Resetera's pro-censorship crowd won't even look at that. Whatever. I'm happy about this bomba, sends a clear message to Nintendo. :]
 
Last edited:

Keep believing that, you modern book burning fascists. 🙄🤦‍♀️

Edit: Another one:


Here's the thing: TMS is basically a Persona-game with idols as its core theme. Both are popular in Japan. And it's on a handheld, too! Saying 'nobofy wanted this game' is pure nonsensical deflection, because Resetera refuses to admit the real cause: censorship.

Would it have been a mega seller uncensored? No. But it'd have been a solid 50k FW sales instead of 18k.

And It's not about 'no sexy costumes'. As these people ridiculingly use tbe term 'vagina bones', fact is: Someone at Nintendo Treehouse looked at TMS and went: "Omg, a 17 yo anime girl having hip bone shadows?! That's a big nono! Away with it!". It is *that* attitude and work philosophy I , and apparently many other potential audience members, do NOT want to support. And this games audience was weebs! Those *do* care about stuff like censorship, ya know.

Ofc, there's a lot more censorship than just 1-2 censored costumes, but Resetera's pro-censorship crowd won't even look at that. Whatever. I'm happy about this bomba, sends a clear message to Nintendo. :]
One thing's for sure, the Japanese gamers who bought the Wii U version of TMS were not playing around.
 

nush

Member
The counter productive thing about B-Dubs instructing to give out 1 month bans is that in his mind it's like grounding a child for a month and hoping they learn a lesson, or to use another analogy hitting a dog harder so it does not have an accident in the house.

As I'm working through his sixty fucking thousand posts here, someone that mostly lives online like B-dubs that would be like banning them from the internet. But it does not work like that, the banned will have thier eyes opened as many do here that return and are just good members with respectful differing views becuse they have time to look at other opinions in differing communities.

Keep it up B-Dubs, your weakening your community and inflating other communities.
 

#Phonepunk#

Banned
There are more armed people in the populace than members of the U.S. Armed forces, as well as members of the Armed Forces who will not go with tyranny.
this is the thing. the anti gun nuts think "the military" and "the US populace" are two different things. they aren't. it's the kind of narrative you can build when you are privileged enough to not have to personally know or be related to anyone in the military.
Your pew-pews aint gonna do shit against everything the military has at their disposal nowadays
if the country has dissolved to the point where the military is in control and we live in a lawless land where people are going to try and break into your house to steal your food and rape your wife then damn sure you will be glad you hang onto "your pew-pews"

people act like "lol you can't defeat the US military" as if that's the only application of guns. maybe for your strawman, it is.
 
Last edited:
this is the thing. the anti gun nuts think "the military" and "the US populace" are two different things. they aren't. it's the kind of narrative you can build when you are privileged enough to not have to personally know or be related to anyone in the military.

if the country has dissolved to the point where the military is in control and we live in a lawless land where people are going to try and break into your house to steal your food and rape your wife then damn sure you will be glad you hang onto "your pew-pews"

people act like "lol you can't defeat the US military" as if that's the only application of guns. maybe for your strawman, it is.
Seems like the ol' standby from 4chan needs to be posted again for the "US military will just blast you, so why carry guns?" argument:

QXB412Y-EkKmHO_-f40TokJz0YEX06ccosmqFx2EvSg.png
 

pulga

Banned
this is the thing. the anti gun nuts think "the military" and "the US populace" are two different things. they aren't. it's the kind of narrative you can build when you are privileged enough to not have to personally know or be related to anyone in the military.

if the country has dissolved to the point where the military is in control and we live in a lawless land where people are going to try and break into your house to steal your food and rape your wife then damn sure you will be glad you hang onto "your pew-pews"

people act like "lol you can't defeat the US military" as if that's the only application of guns. maybe for your strawman, it is.
i wasnt speaking on your mad max fantasy though nor arguing fighting against the military is the only reason to own one, so this looks more like your strawman mate.
 
I would like to point that the same people who say Trump is literally Hitler, that the US government and court system and US as a whole is racist/sexist, are the same people who are also saying you should give your right to own a gun. Give your guns to Literally Hitler and Company. They are the only ones that should have them.

That is a mind fuck to me lol
 

#Phonepunk#

Banned
this post is beyond amazing. one of the biggest Hillary stans letting the mask slip.
Winny(๑•̀ㅂ•́)و
Member

6 minutes ago
jviggy43 said:
Are you saying being Jewish is less important than being a woman? (also I never said anything close to what you suggested)
I love how you totally refuse to answer the question that was simply clarifying something you absolutely implied, but whatever...

Do I think it's more important that a woman becomes President of the United States than a Jewish man? Yes, I do.

Women are horrifically underrepresented and undervalued in literally every single social and economic criteria you can think of. Less than a quarter of elected politicians in America are women, which is totally unacceptable, and you finally have a fantastic candidate for the presidency that's also a woman and you want her to drop out of the race for a old, white man because he's Jewish?

And don't pretend that's not what you meant. You're the one who brought up his Jewish heritage as a rebuttal against him stepping aside so a woman could be in charge - at a time when news is rampant of reports he doesn't think a woman can win, no less.

At least I can say my country has had multiple women in the highest office of power. What's America's excuse?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom