Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #51 - highhopes (09/12/2013) [-]
If it's illegal, it's illegal. You can't paint on another people's property.
User avatar #71 to #51 - luckyspirit (09/12/2013) [-]
I don't believe in the idea of owning property or owning land. It's like... You believe own a bunch of rocks and dirt, essentially.
User avatar #75 to #71 - highhopes (09/12/2013) [-]
So it would be ok if I stayed at your house for a while, then?
User avatar #76 to #75 - luckyspirit (09/12/2013) [-]
As long as you don't interrupt me when I'm masturbating, then sure, why not?
#77 to #76 - highhopes (09/12/2013) [-]
Every fap you make, I'll be watching you.
#62 to #51 - numbertwozeldafan ONLINE (09/12/2013) [-]
I'm going to go ahead and assume that you're either 12 years old or a republican.
User avatar #74 to #62 - highhopes (09/12/2013) [-]
I'm a 21 year old Norwegian, you ignorant slut.
#79 to #74 - numbertwozeldafan ONLINE (09/12/2013) [-]
Yes, I'm finding you so easy to believe.
#68 to #62 - elyiia (09/12/2013) [-]
Only a 12 year old, or someone with the mentality of one, would think it's acceptable to grafiti someone's property.
User avatar #85 to #68 - numbertwozeldafan ONLINE (09/12/2013) [-]
That there is what we call 'ad hominem', my friend. Try not to use such a terrible argument when having a debate.

As I've detailed below; many individuals, from artists to politicians, feel that some (not all, mind you) graffiti is justifiable as a perfectly valid medium of art.
User avatar #88 to #85 - elyiia (09/12/2013) [-]
I could go and paint a Picasso on someone's wall, if they don't want it on their property they have every right to remove it. Not messing with someone's property is one of the basic concepts of Western society.
User avatar #89 to #88 - numbertwozeldafan ONLINE (09/12/2013) [-]
I'd continue playing devil's advocate here and provide a counterargument but that's the first real argument I've heart on this topic from a contender all day, kudos to you. Have a thumb or two.
User avatar #67 to #62 - capslockrage ONLINE (09/12/2013) [-]
Or maybe he just has common sense.
User avatar #80 to #67 - numbertwozeldafan ONLINE (09/12/2013) [-]
No, he has adherence, as common sense is something that, surprisingly, differs from person to person. It's a stark difference when many would consider the removal of some 'graffiti' to be the true crime.
User avatar #81 to #80 - capslockrage ONLINE (09/12/2013) [-]
No, laws are laws.
Graffiti is against the law, plain and simple. Not to say they are inherently bad people for doing so, but you can't complain when people don't want you to paint **** on their property.
complaining about that is possibly the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

That's like a murderer complaining about being arrested for murder. "yeah but I didn't like that guy so I had the right to kill him! who are you to tell me I can't?"
User avatar #82 to #81 - numbertwozeldafan ONLINE (09/12/2013) [-]
Just because a handful of laws are justified, does not mean that all of them are, do not use such logical fallacies in discussions if you wish to be seen as intelligent.

Many such laws are controversial, this is why gay and abortion laws are challenged every day. Hell, this is why voting rights for blacks and women were argued about; laws are not perfect and are more often than not flawed. Arguing about them, and in doing so, exercising your right to argue about them, is what makes a democracy a democracy.
User avatar #83 to #82 - capslockrage ONLINE (09/12/2013) [-]
Yes, but it's not a debate for this law.

You can't just paint on other peoples buildings, and it's idiotic to think so.
User avatar #84 to #83 - numbertwozeldafan ONLINE (09/12/2013) [-]
Except that YOU turned it into a law debate, my friend.

Idiotic to think so? Why? Because the law? I happen to think it's idiotic to believe that pieces of land can be bought and sold as a commodity, but that's not going to ever stop people from doing it. Artists, genuine artists, cannot be restricted by their tapestry.
User avatar #86 to #84 - capslockrage ONLINE (09/12/2013) [-]
You're a hippie.
Do you think we should just live in one big commune and share everything?

This isn't a debate, it isn't an opinion, it's a fact.
It's against the law to take someone's property, and then put your **** all over it.
User avatar #87 to #86 - numbertwozeldafan ONLINE (09/12/2013) [-]
There we go with your Ad hominems again, and don't go throwing slippery slopes like communes in there (and this discussion aside, I have a long-standing hatred of hippies).

This is indeed a debate; you're simply so bad at arguing that you've resorted to baseless name calling and logical fallacies. Not once in this discussion have you said anything that could help me believe you passed middle school.

I'll do the respectable thing and leave this alone now; you've shown that you can only appeal to authority and have no inclination to form your own ideas or debates. Good day sir.
User avatar #90 to #87 - capslockrage ONLINE (09/14/2013) [-]
Know how to use the word before you use it, you can't have multiple "ad hominems"
"ad hominem" is an act
User avatar #91 to #90 - numbertwozeldafan ONLINE (09/14/2013) [-]
So, your saying that you can't have multiple repetitions of an action? I'm interested in knowing more.
User avatar #56 to #51 - darnhaz (09/12/2013) [-]
k
 Friends (0)