Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search
Buy your amazon goods through FJ's link.
Just click this link and search for any product you want. FJ gets a 6% commission on everything you buy.

bobbysnobby    

Rank #3466 on Comments
no avatar Level 230 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Offline
Send mail to bobbysnobby Block bobbysnobby Invite bobbysnobby to be your friend
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Date Signed Up:2/20/2010
Last Login:8/19/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#3466
Highest Content Rank:#25533
Highest Comment Rank:#2215
Content Thumbs: 16 total,  21 ,  5
Comment Thumbs: 3320 total,  4395 ,  1075
Content Level Progress: 33.89% (20/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 51% (51/100)
Level 230 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz → Level 231 Comments: Ambassador Of Lulz
Subscribers:0
Content Views:4915
Total Comments Made:895
FJ Points:3049

latest user's comments

#87 - By that definition every game is casual, thus the label has no…  [+] (13 new replies) 05/03/2014 on (Insert German masochist joke) 0
#89 - adamks (05/03/2014) [-]
To compete at a high level of something like Starcraft or League of Legends or something you have to sink a fuckload of your life into it. Also stuff like dwarf fortress. Dark Souls haven't got a very high learning curve, you just die a lot.
#181 - omegat (05/03/2014) [-]
>League of Legends
>Not Casul

#204 - adamks (05/06/2014) [-]
I assume you're a DotA player or something akin.
#117 - anonymous (05/03/2014) [-]
CODs a casual game but it has a pro scene where they have sunk so much of their life into it to get really really good.

A non casual game is a game like Diablo 3 where you have to sink 200+ hours to complete minimum.
#205 - adamks (05/06/2014) [-]
Depends what you consider "complete". If you want to compete on the highest difficulty I can assure you that 200 hours will not do the trick, but if you just want to get through the main quests and get to max level, that can be done in roughly 5 hours, or less, assuming no one is boosting you.
#90 - bobbysnobby (05/03/2014) [-]
But it IS a casual game. You don't have to sink half you life into it. You can easily play it on a casual level. Just because it has a pro scene doesnt mean that everyone needs to play at a pro level.
#92 - adamks (05/03/2014) [-]
Games with low learning curves are casual games (mostly). And Dark Souls have a low learning curve.
User avatar #163 - bronybox (05/03/2014) [-]
I can't say how many times I've seen people start playing the game and drop is because it was too hard.
#183 - adamks (05/03/2014) [-]
Were those people 12?
User avatar #189 - bronybox (05/03/2014) [-]
No, they were just casual gamers.
User avatar #162 - bronybox (05/03/2014) [-]
Dark Souls, low learning curve, hahahahaha... You made a funny mate.
#104 - anonymous (05/03/2014) [-]
The only reason dark soul's learning curve is low is because to many people look up guides on how to beat a certain area or what to expect in the future. If this was done to starcraft or LoL (which it is) then they have low learning curves as well.
#147 - anonymous (05/03/2014) [-]
You can look for guides all you want in LoL, but it won't help you against other peoples actions unless you play the game.
#152 - If you stop and think about bioshock infinites story (the feat… 05/02/2014 on top kek +1
#27 - We dont treat people well because they deserve it, we treat pe… 05/02/2014 on His crime wasn't "humane" 0
#18 - why do you care what manor their deaths are in? Does it matter…  [+] (2 new replies) 05/02/2014 on His crime wasn't "humane" +2
#19 - opskametric (05/02/2014) [-]
I believe I clarified this already, it's not about vengeance, that's not our place. it's about not allowing that kind of behavior within our society. the costs and politics behind it only work to lengthen what should be a simple idea: We Don't Allow This Behavior, and we shouldn't allow any type of decency to those who have none. but this is just my opinion
#27 - bobbysnobby (05/02/2014) [-]
We dont treat people well because they deserve it, we treat people well because that is the correct thing to do. Being decent towards prisoners of war in WW2 was one thing the germans sucked at and they thought it would help prevent uprisings, instead it infuriated and made people resent them. If our government dealt with criminals with "a bullet" and be done with it, it would not seem as being efficient, it would be seen as cold and would remind people of government firing squads.
#42 - Im about to ruin Christmas for you all like it was ruined for …  [+] (2 new replies) 05/02/2014 on skydiver kitteh 0
#48 - powertrooper (05/02/2014) [-]
#44 - anonymous (05/02/2014) [-]
#89 - Spooky 05/02/2014 on Hits me in the Feels 0
#203 - Just a cursory google search nets one states definition, keep… 05/02/2014 on (untitled) 0
#193 - Look at the title of that wikipedia page it says assault rifle… 05/02/2014 on (untitled) 0
#167 - Thats just untrue, the ban on assault weapons which was propos…  [+] (4 new replies) 05/01/2014 on (untitled) +1
User avatar #174 - froterons (05/02/2014) [-]
I'm sorry, but that is wrong. An assault weapon is a select fire weapon that may either be Fully automatic, semi automatic or have a burst fire option, and use intermediate cartridges and have a detachable magazine. Otherwise, it is just a rifle. It's true that certain states have different definitions of what an assault rifle is, but that is the true meaning. Cosmetics make no difference in a rifles function. The assault weapons bill went into effect in 1994 and was lifted in 2004, it limited the magazine cap to 10 and banned certain firearms by name.

#212 - qwermy (05/02/2014) [-]
You mean "assault rifle", which must be select-fire. "Assault weapon" is a political term first applied in laws with the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.
#203 - bobbysnobby (05/02/2014) [-]
www.jud.ct.gov/ji/criminal/glossary/assaultweapon.htm Just a cursory google search nets one states definition, keep in mind it varies from state to state.

This list includes more than just automatic firing.
#193 - bobbysnobby (05/02/2014) [-]
Look at the title of that wikipedia page it says assault rifle, not assault weapon. There are assault weapons which are obviously not automatic, for instance Shotguns that have pistol stocks are technically assault weapons. If your going to do research to correct me by all means do so, I dont even mind that its Wikipedia, but at least use the right page.
#128 - Im not against the second amendment even though I think that i…  [+] (6 new replies) 05/01/2014 on (untitled) 0
User avatar #134 - froterons (05/01/2014) [-]
Assault Weapons are defined as a firearm that has the ability to be fully automatic, American's cannot own an assault weapon without first going through extensive paperwork and paying a 200 dollar tax stamp, as well as background checks. I really don't know why they call them assault weapons anyway, you can assault someone with a butter knife and they don't call it an assault butter knife. The AR-15's or AKM's you see at gun stores are semi automatic, semi automatic technology has been around for a hundred or so years. Those weapons are very practical, can be used in hunting and can be used exceptionally well when defending yourself. Bump firing is also not the same as fully automatic, and is much less accurate.
#167 - bobbysnobby (05/01/2014) [-]
Thats just untrue, the ban on assault weapons which was proposed in 1994 I think, was repealed.

Assault weapons are not defined by being fully automatic, and Americans can own them as of 2008 I think. You confuse the term assault rifle, which is legally defined by a few things but most importantly selective fire, with assault weapons which have some but not total similar features. Assault weapons are actually more common than you might think and yes the Ar-15s and AKMs are technically assault weapons with the way they care commonly constructed, their usefulness aside. My argument is not that those weapons should be illegal, its that I dont understand why people Need them, and that the pro gun camp acts like they are losing ground and that everyone is trying to take their firearms away despite the legislative ground they have made.

I donno where you came up with the notion that Assault weapons are defined by their firing mechanism or of being automatic, but the legal definition of assault weapon is a complicated one which includes the stock, the firing cartridge, among other things including cosmetics. The way the gun is put together is what determines the definition. AR-15s were banned and then they reconstructed many of them in the way they would be sold to not qualify them as being an assault weapon, and thus avoiding the ban for those 14 or so years. Its much more complicated than you have described, and your summery of the "Assault weapon" label is purely popular culture and doesnt represent how the law treats the term, if anything it betrays a lack of understanding as fully automatic weapons to my understanding are termed as Title 2 weapons which include alterations making the weapon fully automatic, not just the state at sale. The final nail in this coffin is that differing states define assault weapons differently
User avatar #174 - froterons (05/02/2014) [-]
I'm sorry, but that is wrong. An assault weapon is a select fire weapon that may either be Fully automatic, semi automatic or have a burst fire option, and use intermediate cartridges and have a detachable magazine. Otherwise, it is just a rifle. It's true that certain states have different definitions of what an assault rifle is, but that is the true meaning. Cosmetics make no difference in a rifles function. The assault weapons bill went into effect in 1994 and was lifted in 2004, it limited the magazine cap to 10 and banned certain firearms by name.

#212 - qwermy (05/02/2014) [-]
You mean "assault rifle", which must be select-fire. "Assault weapon" is a political term first applied in laws with the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.
#203 - bobbysnobby (05/02/2014) [-]
www.jud.ct.gov/ji/criminal/glossary/assaultweapon.htm Just a cursory google search nets one states definition, keep in mind it varies from state to state.

This list includes more than just automatic firing.
#193 - bobbysnobby (05/02/2014) [-]
Look at the title of that wikipedia page it says assault rifle, not assault weapon. There are assault weapons which are obviously not automatic, for instance Shotguns that have pistol stocks are technically assault weapons. If your going to do research to correct me by all means do so, I dont even mind that its Wikipedia, but at least use the right page.
#102 - The argument that guns dont have a will and that its the peopl…  [+] (8 new replies) 05/01/2014 on (untitled) +5
User avatar #116 - froterons (05/01/2014) [-]
People are generally good, most people don't want to hurt anybody and the people who own firearms, of all types, NEVER hurt anybody with them. There are 350 million people in the united states, and there are just as many guns as their are people, with polls and surveys saying around 40% of the population owning a firearm. Though that percentage varies, and I don't think there will ever be a correct percentage of firearm ownership in the united states. Even so, out of all those firearms and all those people who own firearms, around 9,000 gun crimes are committed each year, Out of the 40% or 140,000,000 million firearm owners, that's minuscule. It's easy to see that guns are not a problem, there is no line that has to be drawn. But of course, to each their own.
#128 - bobbysnobby (05/01/2014) [-]
Im not against the second amendment even though I think that its primary reason for existing is no longer a reasonable argument for it continuing. Im also not for removing the right of the people to own guns. I have a lot of friends and family who live in basically farm country miles and miles from police or sheriffs, I also have friends who hunt I think they have real and piratical reasons to own firearms. I dont know why they would need to own an assault rifle, or why gun proponents pushed the bumb loading mechanism as a work around the legal restrictions put on firerates by way of the firing mechanism. To me those are signs and symptoms of an out of control gun culture.

I think you are correct that the absolute numbers of gun related deaths are low, more people die by human error car crashes. I also dont think that that has any place in the argument. The same reasoning could be applied to mercury related deaths, it would be like saying we shouldnt regulate mercury levels in our fish because the absolute values of illness related to it are low, maybe but once those regulations loosen its much harder to tighten them again afterwords if there is a problem. I do also think that if one could construct a reasonable argument why Americans require assault weapons we would have a discussion. The part I dont understand is that many gun enthusiasts treat it as like class warfare or something that its either every gun, every munition, or its people trying to deny them their 2nd amendment rights.

Until the gun proponents come to the discussion with a more reasonable approach and with some level of compromise they will be met with resistance. It seems memory is short lived as just 20 years ago there was a ban on weapons which are now permitted. In federal and state laws, those sort of turn around are rare but it doesnt seem to be enough, and more ground is demanded I'm not sure why.
User avatar #134 - froterons (05/01/2014) [-]
Assault Weapons are defined as a firearm that has the ability to be fully automatic, American's cannot own an assault weapon without first going through extensive paperwork and paying a 200 dollar tax stamp, as well as background checks. I really don't know why they call them assault weapons anyway, you can assault someone with a butter knife and they don't call it an assault butter knife. The AR-15's or AKM's you see at gun stores are semi automatic, semi automatic technology has been around for a hundred or so years. Those weapons are very practical, can be used in hunting and can be used exceptionally well when defending yourself. Bump firing is also not the same as fully automatic, and is much less accurate.
#167 - bobbysnobby (05/01/2014) [-]
Thats just untrue, the ban on assault weapons which was proposed in 1994 I think, was repealed.

Assault weapons are not defined by being fully automatic, and Americans can own them as of 2008 I think. You confuse the term assault rifle, which is legally defined by a few things but most importantly selective fire, with assault weapons which have some but not total similar features. Assault weapons are actually more common than you might think and yes the Ar-15s and AKMs are technically assault weapons with the way they care commonly constructed, their usefulness aside. My argument is not that those weapons should be illegal, its that I dont understand why people Need them, and that the pro gun camp acts like they are losing ground and that everyone is trying to take their firearms away despite the legislative ground they have made.

I donno where you came up with the notion that Assault weapons are defined by their firing mechanism or of being automatic, but the legal definition of assault weapon is a complicated one which includes the stock, the firing cartridge, among other things including cosmetics. The way the gun is put together is what determines the definition. AR-15s were banned and then they reconstructed many of them in the way they would be sold to not qualify them as being an assault weapon, and thus avoiding the ban for those 14 or so years. Its much more complicated than you have described, and your summery of the "Assault weapon" label is purely popular culture and doesnt represent how the law treats the term, if anything it betrays a lack of understanding as fully automatic weapons to my understanding are termed as Title 2 weapons which include alterations making the weapon fully automatic, not just the state at sale. The final nail in this coffin is that differing states define assault weapons differently
User avatar #174 - froterons (05/02/2014) [-]
I'm sorry, but that is wrong. An assault weapon is a select fire weapon that may either be Fully automatic, semi automatic or have a burst fire option, and use intermediate cartridges and have a detachable magazine. Otherwise, it is just a rifle. It's true that certain states have different definitions of what an assault rifle is, but that is the true meaning. Cosmetics make no difference in a rifles function. The assault weapons bill went into effect in 1994 and was lifted in 2004, it limited the magazine cap to 10 and banned certain firearms by name.

#212 - qwermy (05/02/2014) [-]
You mean "assault rifle", which must be select-fire. "Assault weapon" is a political term first applied in laws with the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban.
#203 - bobbysnobby (05/02/2014) [-]
www.jud.ct.gov/ji/criminal/glossary/assaultweapon.htm Just a cursory google search nets one states definition, keep in mind it varies from state to state.

This list includes more than just automatic firing.
#193 - bobbysnobby (05/02/2014) [-]
Look at the title of that wikipedia page it says assault rifle, not assault weapon. There are assault weapons which are obviously not automatic, for instance Shotguns that have pistol stocks are technically assault weapons. If your going to do research to correct me by all means do so, I dont even mind that its Wikipedia, but at least use the right page.
#168 - I donno whats going on in this comment threat, but the slight … 04/30/2014 on Engineering School Project 0
#146 - Its a childish and idiotic idea that we shouldnt change for ot…  [+] (1 new reply) 04/27/2014 on #rekt +1
User avatar #234 - elmosays (04/27/2014) [-]
that's a great point and i think you have adjusted my opinion but the problem with the whole hair this is often time the man wouldn't shave because either they think its unmasculine or society says it's unmasculin and the opposite goes for the women.
#73 - Your opinion is ****** and there is a reason its …  [+] (4 new replies) 04/27/2014 on #rekt +3
User avatar #100 - elmosays (04/27/2014) [-]
I don't think anyone should make themselves fit for someone. If my boyfriend is hairy i don't feel the need to tell him to change I'd love him either way.
#146 - bobbysnobby (04/27/2014) [-]
Its a childish and idiotic idea that we shouldnt change for others. If I do something that bothers someone else, friend, girlfriend roomate or what have you and they dislike it they should bring it up. I should and do try to change it so it doesnt bother them. Whats mean or uncalled for is to demand people change things they cannot, I have a large nose if my gf didnt like it and asked me to change it that would be a little out of my power. If she doesnt like scratchy facial hair I can change that.

We arent Disney princesses we dont get to do whatever we want and just expect people to like us. We might have people who we love, and who love us but we still need to put effort into them liking us. There is a dramatic difference.

If someone doesnt like a girl to have armpit hair or a guy to have a beard facial hair in general, if you you or that person cannot be bothered for the minor inconvenience of shaving that should tell you something about the relationship.
User avatar #234 - elmosays (04/27/2014) [-]
that's a great point and i think you have adjusted my opinion but the problem with the whole hair this is often time the man wouldn't shave because either they think its unmasculine or society says it's unmasculin and the opposite goes for the women.
User avatar #75 - thefunnyside (04/27/2014) [-]
I'm talking about the men who are half bear yet expect women to shave because it's "unclean". Very few men shave their backs/chests
#99 - Dark souls 2 is not worthy successor to demon souls or dark so… 04/27/2014 on Day 2 release 0
#97 - i dont agree with you.  [+] (1 new reply) 04/27/2014 on Day 2 release +1
User avatar #98 - flemsdfer (04/27/2014) [-]
That was a very british sentence.
#92 - We now have the lead for when they adapt "The Taggerung&q… 04/27/2014 on This needs to be a kids show 0
#90 - How does the skyhook actually work? Thats the least o… 04/27/2014 on This is just asking for an... 0
#28 - Picture  [+] (1 new reply) 04/26/2014 on Blissfull Ignorance +3
User avatar #29 - assdoreponyfucker (04/26/2014) [-]
Kappa
#15 - The counter argument is raven is also a colour, Ravenclaw as i…  [+] (1 new reply) 04/26/2014 on Hairy Pooper +2
#38 - anonymous (04/26/2014) [-]
The colour is named after Ravens.
They could have use a different shade for the name if it was named after an eagle.
The symbol should still be a Raven.
#17 - Picture 04/25/2014 on Richard Harris +49
#7 - a wild pat appears 04/24/2014 on (untitled) 0
#13 - citation needed 04/23/2014 on If there is a hell. +2
#95 - There is a more usable in public method for those of you who g…  [+] (1 new reply) 04/22/2014 on Life's full of tough decisions 0
User avatar #111 - calawesome (04/22/2014) [-]
And when do I cum?
#12 - If i were a gambling man, I would say OP watches RedLettermedi… 04/21/2014 on Dad joke level Bill Murray 0
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 160 / Total items point value: 1820

Comments(0):

 

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
No comments!
 Friends (0)