x
Click to expand

mexicoman

Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Age: 23
Consoles Owned: xbox 360, gamecube, wii
Video Games Played: halo 4, gta 5, fallout nv
X-box Gamertag: mexicoman101
Interests: comedy, poetry, pornography, hats, drugs, politics, philosophy, sitcoms
Date Signed Up:12/11/2010
Last Login:3/23/2015
Location:Washington
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Content Ranking:#6219
Comment Ranking:#29657
Highest Content Rank:#3943
Highest Comment Rank:#8067
Content Thumbs: 1870 total,  2299 ,  429
Comment Thumbs: 1437 total,  2005 ,  568
Content Level Progress: 21% (21/100)
Level 117 Content: Funny Junkie → Level 118 Content: Funny Junkie
Comment Level Progress: 89% (89/100)
Level 213 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 214 Comments: Comedic Genius
Subscribers:1
Content Views:146247
Times Content Favorited:111 times
Total Comments Made:693
FJ Points:3252
Favorite Tags: the (9) | game (5) | to (5) | a (4) | for (4) | in (4) | on (4) | You (4) | are (3) | tags (3) | your (3) | and (2) | black (2) | do (2) | fags (2) | High (2) | i (2) | kill (2) | Lost (2) | omegle (2)
Im a decent guy, a good one when you really get to know me. I like to eat culture and shit out all of the mediocre soul dead mental scarring I recieve in the form of, writing, or performing humor conceived in and filtered through my own prejudices.I also love the shit out of the Metal Gear Solid Franchise and free stuff.

latest user's comments

#131 - Would you say the same of the Eskimo's? Native South American …  [+] (5 new replies) 06/30/2012 on Just another day in America 0
User avatar #137 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
biologically speaking, the eskimos (inuit) people, the native americans and the south americans are not too far past the cro-magnon stage of evolution, just a step behind modern europeans, but culturally they are backwards

the amish are a form of christian faith, and choose to be backwards on that ideal, and kind of set a bad example of RELIGION holding a people back

africans however are backwards in every way, both biologically and culturally, fossils found of species Homo sapiens idaltu dates back 160,000 years old and modern blacks do not display much difference from them so blacks have not evolved much over this time, whereas the cro-magnons are only 43,000 years old

for the eskimos, native americans and south americans, the cro-magnons do have slightly more brain mass, so if they are theoretically born smarter (hence mayans, aztecs, etc did have technology before us) then perhaps the reason they havent been the dominant race on the planet is they were smart enough to see something we havent yet, destroyed their cultures and left the remaining people backwards to protect them from something

there is still the unsolved issue of atlantis, maybe they fucked up something so bad and were destroyed, and all people of their race (inuit/native usa/south usa) turned their back on technology to avoid destruction?
User avatar #138 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
So are you saying that these primitive African tribes are not motivated by religion or culture? Why? Because they are black? Are black people incapable of casting aside technology out of principle or some other understandable context? Maybe the problem is that you are putting too much weight on RACE. Maybe you should start looking at the individual based on the content of their character rather than the skin color.
User avatar #141 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
blacks when left to their own religions and cultures stay primitive, while blacks who adhere to white religions and culture, though not necessarily motivated as one could hope, are still more motivated than the black tribals back home

black people in general, when keeping to what passes as their culture based on the country they are in, stagnate and lack motivation to do much else other than what their people have always done - tribals keep being tribal, blacks in african cities just keep starving or getting involved in gang warfare, blacks in usa commit crime or sing rap

the small percent of blacks who are motivated, are because they seek to emulate white ideals, to become educated and successful, from the blacks who were educated to be the butlers in southern plantations. to the blacks who worked their asses off to be the pilots and navy men in WW2, to martin luther king, jesse jackson, barack obama, etc,
you dont see ghetto trash getting to the top
User avatar #144 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
I am just going to let your transparent racism there make my argument for me.
User avatar #148 - konradkurze (07/01/2012) [-]
youre just upset i can provide facts while you just have meaningless opinions
#127 - First of all, I do not believe you. Second, the prod…  [+] (7 new replies) 06/30/2012 on Just another day in America 0
User avatar #129 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
i was referring to the former slaves used by the Afrikaans (white africans), said slaves upon getting their freedom at the end of apartheid, merely slipped back into tribal ideals, with warlords setting out neighborhood territories in the same way primitive africans did with open lands

the blacks that to this day live in tribal villages do so out of choice, they have had thousands of years to change but refuse to do so, one could say that they are proof that black people left to their own devices and ideals, sit at the status quo of the world they live in and make no effort to change it, blacks have only gotten anywhere when either pushed forwards by other races or like in usa, the ones raised by white education

and for the record, if i fuck myself, your sister will get lonely
#131 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
Would you say the same of the Eskimo's? Native South American tribes? The Amish? People live in backwards societies all over the world, its got nothing to do with pigment. Not to mention that that is NOT most of Africa. We are all individuals, and our character is NOT determined in any way by our pigment.
User avatar #137 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
biologically speaking, the eskimos (inuit) people, the native americans and the south americans are not too far past the cro-magnon stage of evolution, just a step behind modern europeans, but culturally they are backwards

the amish are a form of christian faith, and choose to be backwards on that ideal, and kind of set a bad example of RELIGION holding a people back

africans however are backwards in every way, both biologically and culturally, fossils found of species Homo sapiens idaltu dates back 160,000 years old and modern blacks do not display much difference from them so blacks have not evolved much over this time, whereas the cro-magnons are only 43,000 years old

for the eskimos, native americans and south americans, the cro-magnons do have slightly more brain mass, so if they are theoretically born smarter (hence mayans, aztecs, etc did have technology before us) then perhaps the reason they havent been the dominant race on the planet is they were smart enough to see something we havent yet, destroyed their cultures and left the remaining people backwards to protect them from something

there is still the unsolved issue of atlantis, maybe they fucked up something so bad and were destroyed, and all people of their race (inuit/native usa/south usa) turned their back on technology to avoid destruction?
User avatar #138 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
So are you saying that these primitive African tribes are not motivated by religion or culture? Why? Because they are black? Are black people incapable of casting aside technology out of principle or some other understandable context? Maybe the problem is that you are putting too much weight on RACE. Maybe you should start looking at the individual based on the content of their character rather than the skin color.
User avatar #141 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
blacks when left to their own religions and cultures stay primitive, while blacks who adhere to white religions and culture, though not necessarily motivated as one could hope, are still more motivated than the black tribals back home

black people in general, when keeping to what passes as their culture based on the country they are in, stagnate and lack motivation to do much else other than what their people have always done - tribals keep being tribal, blacks in african cities just keep starving or getting involved in gang warfare, blacks in usa commit crime or sing rap

the small percent of blacks who are motivated, are because they seek to emulate white ideals, to become educated and successful, from the blacks who were educated to be the butlers in southern plantations. to the blacks who worked their asses off to be the pilots and navy men in WW2, to martin luther king, jesse jackson, barack obama, etc,
you dont see ghetto trash getting to the top
User avatar #144 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
I am just going to let your transparent racism there make my argument for me.
User avatar #148 - konradkurze (07/01/2012) [-]
youre just upset i can provide facts while you just have meaningless opinions
#112 - Separate species cannot mate with each other. Your argument is…  [+] (10 new replies) 06/30/2012 on Just another day in America +1
#126 - anonymous (06/30/2012) [-]
You sir, are my hero.
User avatar #120 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
ahem
its been proven that an ape can carry a human baby to term,
its been proven that a pigs liver can filter human blood
horses and donkeys can mate and have young

the blacks in the wild CHOOSE to remain primitive, the former slaves live in the cities which are being built and paid for by WHITES, while in the meantime the blacks fight and kill each other or starve
#127 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
First of all, I do not believe you.

Second, the products of donkey-horse fuckings are always sterile. Unlike mulatto people. You are trying to use science to justify your antiquated ideas, and you are disgusting for it.

Third, the former slaves have the good fortune of living in America, not Africa. They were not allowed the education or opportunity of whites after slavery however. But we can see that when given the opportunity they can thrive just like white people. African blacks were SET BACK by a lack of resources and European intervention as I said before. Read 'Guns, Germs, and Steel'. The ghettos that American blacks were forced into are torn apart by violence ad poverty because of the drug war.

Fourthly, go fuck yourself.
User avatar #129 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
i was referring to the former slaves used by the Afrikaans (white africans), said slaves upon getting their freedom at the end of apartheid, merely slipped back into tribal ideals, with warlords setting out neighborhood territories in the same way primitive africans did with open lands

the blacks that to this day live in tribal villages do so out of choice, they have had thousands of years to change but refuse to do so, one could say that they are proof that black people left to their own devices and ideals, sit at the status quo of the world they live in and make no effort to change it, blacks have only gotten anywhere when either pushed forwards by other races or like in usa, the ones raised by white education

and for the record, if i fuck myself, your sister will get lonely
#131 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
Would you say the same of the Eskimo's? Native South American tribes? The Amish? People live in backwards societies all over the world, its got nothing to do with pigment. Not to mention that that is NOT most of Africa. We are all individuals, and our character is NOT determined in any way by our pigment.
User avatar #137 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
biologically speaking, the eskimos (inuit) people, the native americans and the south americans are not too far past the cro-magnon stage of evolution, just a step behind modern europeans, but culturally they are backwards

the amish are a form of christian faith, and choose to be backwards on that ideal, and kind of set a bad example of RELIGION holding a people back

africans however are backwards in every way, both biologically and culturally, fossils found of species Homo sapiens idaltu dates back 160,000 years old and modern blacks do not display much difference from them so blacks have not evolved much over this time, whereas the cro-magnons are only 43,000 years old

for the eskimos, native americans and south americans, the cro-magnons do have slightly more brain mass, so if they are theoretically born smarter (hence mayans, aztecs, etc did have technology before us) then perhaps the reason they havent been the dominant race on the planet is they were smart enough to see something we havent yet, destroyed their cultures and left the remaining people backwards to protect them from something

there is still the unsolved issue of atlantis, maybe they fucked up something so bad and were destroyed, and all people of their race (inuit/native usa/south usa) turned their back on technology to avoid destruction?
User avatar #138 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
So are you saying that these primitive African tribes are not motivated by religion or culture? Why? Because they are black? Are black people incapable of casting aside technology out of principle or some other understandable context? Maybe the problem is that you are putting too much weight on RACE. Maybe you should start looking at the individual based on the content of their character rather than the skin color.
User avatar #141 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
blacks when left to their own religions and cultures stay primitive, while blacks who adhere to white religions and culture, though not necessarily motivated as one could hope, are still more motivated than the black tribals back home

black people in general, when keeping to what passes as their culture based on the country they are in, stagnate and lack motivation to do much else other than what their people have always done - tribals keep being tribal, blacks in african cities just keep starving or getting involved in gang warfare, blacks in usa commit crime or sing rap

the small percent of blacks who are motivated, are because they seek to emulate white ideals, to become educated and successful, from the blacks who were educated to be the butlers in southern plantations. to the blacks who worked their asses off to be the pilots and navy men in WW2, to martin luther king, jesse jackson, barack obama, etc,
you dont see ghetto trash getting to the top
User avatar #144 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
I am just going to let your transparent racism there make my argument for me.
User avatar #148 - konradkurze (07/01/2012) [-]
youre just upset i can provide facts while you just have meaningless opinions
#93 - Because she obviously couldn't have heard her husband choking … 06/30/2012 on Just another day in America 0
#21 - YouseewhatIdidthere 06/30/2012 on You got the touch! 0
#88 - Yeah **** those moral fags, actually being concerned wh…  [+] (1 new reply) 06/30/2012 on Just another day in America -1
#114 - arbie has deleted their comment.
#85 - Black people are not a separate species. They are just like wh…  [+] (12 new replies) 06/30/2012 on Just another day in America +1
#106 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
This image has expired
they are closer to apes, they may share an ancestor in common somewhere way back in the path of evolution but they clearly have primitive aspects

its not just pigments, its the thicker facial features such as ears, nose and lips which resemble apes more than humans, the animalistic instinct to resort to violence as the primary reaction to negative events in life, and the base drives of pursuing actions of direct pleasure well above long-term actions

oh by the way, what race still has people living in grass huts?
#112 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
Separate species cannot mate with each other. Your argument is invalid. And by the way, they live in grass huts because the Europeans had the resources to thrive without needing to spend all of their time devoted to subsistence farming. Then the white man came and took over many places in Africa, they in fact also forced many Africans into SLAVERY. I fucking wonder why they weren't as advanced?
#126 - anonymous (06/30/2012) [-]
You sir, are my hero.
User avatar #120 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
ahem
its been proven that an ape can carry a human baby to term,
its been proven that a pigs liver can filter human blood
horses and donkeys can mate and have young

the blacks in the wild CHOOSE to remain primitive, the former slaves live in the cities which are being built and paid for by WHITES, while in the meantime the blacks fight and kill each other or starve
#127 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
First of all, I do not believe you.

Second, the products of donkey-horse fuckings are always sterile. Unlike mulatto people. You are trying to use science to justify your antiquated ideas, and you are disgusting for it.

Third, the former slaves have the good fortune of living in America, not Africa. They were not allowed the education or opportunity of whites after slavery however. But we can see that when given the opportunity they can thrive just like white people. African blacks were SET BACK by a lack of resources and European intervention as I said before. Read 'Guns, Germs, and Steel'. The ghettos that American blacks were forced into are torn apart by violence ad poverty because of the drug war.

Fourthly, go fuck yourself.
User avatar #129 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
i was referring to the former slaves used by the Afrikaans (white africans), said slaves upon getting their freedom at the end of apartheid, merely slipped back into tribal ideals, with warlords setting out neighborhood territories in the same way primitive africans did with open lands

the blacks that to this day live in tribal villages do so out of choice, they have had thousands of years to change but refuse to do so, one could say that they are proof that black people left to their own devices and ideals, sit at the status quo of the world they live in and make no effort to change it, blacks have only gotten anywhere when either pushed forwards by other races or like in usa, the ones raised by white education

and for the record, if i fuck myself, your sister will get lonely
#131 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
Would you say the same of the Eskimo's? Native South American tribes? The Amish? People live in backwards societies all over the world, its got nothing to do with pigment. Not to mention that that is NOT most of Africa. We are all individuals, and our character is NOT determined in any way by our pigment.
User avatar #137 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
biologically speaking, the eskimos (inuit) people, the native americans and the south americans are not too far past the cro-magnon stage of evolution, just a step behind modern europeans, but culturally they are backwards

the amish are a form of christian faith, and choose to be backwards on that ideal, and kind of set a bad example of RELIGION holding a people back

africans however are backwards in every way, both biologically and culturally, fossils found of species Homo sapiens idaltu dates back 160,000 years old and modern blacks do not display much difference from them so blacks have not evolved much over this time, whereas the cro-magnons are only 43,000 years old

for the eskimos, native americans and south americans, the cro-magnons do have slightly more brain mass, so if they are theoretically born smarter (hence mayans, aztecs, etc did have technology before us) then perhaps the reason they havent been the dominant race on the planet is they were smart enough to see something we havent yet, destroyed their cultures and left the remaining people backwards to protect them from something

there is still the unsolved issue of atlantis, maybe they fucked up something so bad and were destroyed, and all people of their race (inuit/native usa/south usa) turned their back on technology to avoid destruction?
User avatar #138 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
So are you saying that these primitive African tribes are not motivated by religion or culture? Why? Because they are black? Are black people incapable of casting aside technology out of principle or some other understandable context? Maybe the problem is that you are putting too much weight on RACE. Maybe you should start looking at the individual based on the content of their character rather than the skin color.
User avatar #141 - konradkurze (06/30/2012) [-]
blacks when left to their own religions and cultures stay primitive, while blacks who adhere to white religions and culture, though not necessarily motivated as one could hope, are still more motivated than the black tribals back home

black people in general, when keeping to what passes as their culture based on the country they are in, stagnate and lack motivation to do much else other than what their people have always done - tribals keep being tribal, blacks in african cities just keep starving or getting involved in gang warfare, blacks in usa commit crime or sing rap

the small percent of blacks who are motivated, are because they seek to emulate white ideals, to become educated and successful, from the blacks who were educated to be the butlers in southern plantations. to the blacks who worked their asses off to be the pilots and navy men in WW2, to martin luther king, jesse jackson, barack obama, etc,
you dont see ghetto trash getting to the top
User avatar #144 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
I am just going to let your transparent racism there make my argument for me.
User avatar #148 - konradkurze (07/01/2012) [-]
youre just upset i can provide facts while you just have meaningless opinions
#6 - *Insert Scary Voice* Change... that you can believe in. 06/30/2012 on Well that's just great +2
#12 - If only he kept his 'freedom' policy when it came to abortion.  [+] (6 new replies) 06/30/2012 on You got the touch! +9
User avatar #79 - SgtObvious (06/30/2012) [-]
There's no such thing as freedom when it comes to abortion.
User avatar #96 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
Actually there is, you can give women the freedom not have to get their abortions via clothes hanger, dying in the process.
User avatar #109 - SgtObvious (07/01/2012) [-]
If a woman would decide to break the law and kill an unborn baby because she doesn't feel like having it after her own irresponsible decision and gets hurt, that's not the government's problem.

When you say freedom in the context of the law, it means freedom within the boundaries of acceptable behavior. Something that arguably borders on murder is not, at least in my opinion and the opinion of many other Americans, acceptable behavior. People say America is a free country, but that doesn't mean that you have TOTAL freedom: you can't kill someone, you can't steal from people, etc. Laws are made to discourage people from engaging in behavior that harms oneself or others. Someone who has not grown to their full potential is still someone that is living. I'm not one of those people that wants to ban birth control because a single cell without capability to sustain itself outside of the body, let alone grow into a new organism, is not a person. But when two of those cells meet, they begin to grow into a living person. They have all the necessary genetic material to live, even if they may not yet be able to contemplate their surroundings.

Now I respect your opinion and I understand why you have it. You belie0ve that woman should have the right to choose what to do with their bodies. I think the only case that abortion is acceptable is after rape, because the woman didn't make the choice to have sex. I just don't see the fairness in being allowed to kill a living organism after making a decision with risks that they are aware about.

Hopefully you don't perceive my argument as an insult to you or to the women who have died during illegal abortions.
#111 - mexicoman (07/01/2012) [-]
Well in the case of rape or a woman being physically unable to give birth without dying it is a given. But the concept of criminalizing things such as drugs, prostitution, and abortion does not hold water with me. I can see more harm being done than good ultimately. To ban abortion would only put a number women in danger and also make them criminals. I would not say that life at all begins at the two cells meeting, for the zygote initially created could not live when outside of the body. If abortion is tantamount to murder then why is there no funeral after a miscarriage? Why doesn't the census count them? Why do we not arrest a woman who has a miscarriage for manslaughter? It just seems to me that the pro-life movement is counter productive to social progress. GIF Unrelated.
User avatar #20 - guywithguitar (06/30/2012) [-]
Why did I read that in his voice?
User avatar #21 - mexicoman (06/30/2012) [-]
YouseewhatIdidthere
#35 - Hey man, **** you. Black people are the same as white p…  [+] (1 new reply) 06/30/2012 on Just another day in America +2
#132 - goproud (06/30/2012) [-]
Well aren't you a fucking idiot. Blacks commit more crimes than whites. Look at prisons. Zimmerman followed Martin. Not a crime. Zimmerman did not say fucking coons as he is not a racist one bit. Treyovn had no right to attack Zimmerman. Get off the fucking race card with this story. They wanted to arrest him but they had nothing on him. They still don't and this bullshit murder 2 charge will be dropped by any judge that isn't an idiot.
#32 - Picture  [+] (1 new reply) 06/30/2012 on Just another day in America +12
#33 - noblescar (06/30/2012) [-]
#3 - He did not deserve the stabbing he got. Its not like Rick coul…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/29/2012 on Scumbag Shane -7
User avatar #23 - xtwinblade (06/29/2012) [-]
He gave the gun to shane to distract him, shane had the gun pulled at his head, if rick tried to pull out his gun shane would shoot him
#17 - anonymous (06/29/2012) [-]
Plus he Shane had a gun pointed to his head.
#96 - Im not saying he isn't, im just saying its british laughter th…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/29/2012 on Give this man a medal -4
#112 - schneidend (06/29/2012) [-]
Why is it that blue names are, the vast majority of the time, the most obnoxious, ignorant niggers around? Are you kidding me? You've never seen, heard of, or met somebody who laughs too hard, loud, or long? Have you never laughed longer than another person before, or did not understand why you found something so incredibly hilarious? What kind of shut-in are you that none of these concepts have been introduced to you before? This isn't a fucking photoshop. There's nothing "fake" here for you to look cool by spotting. It's a person's laugh. I don't even like Ricky Gervais that much. I'm not defending him. Instead, I'm calling you out for the most random bout of inane drivel I have heard all day. Jesus Christ!
User avatar #98 - duchessofcorn (06/29/2012) [-]
That's not true at all
Ricky is just a very raucous person

Don't hate
#13 - Thank Odin! I was one of the lucky few who never got their dic… 06/29/2012 on This ban is very erect +4
#85 - *Insert annoying fake british laughter here*  [+] (4 new replies) 06/29/2012 on Give this man a medal -9
User avatar #94 - duchessofcorn (06/29/2012) [-]
"Fake British laughter."
What?
Ricky is British... I don't even
User avatar #96 - mexicoman (06/29/2012) [-]
Im not saying he isn't, im just saying its british laughter that is annoyingly faked. Other than the fake laugh I love the show but damn he plays that laugh out.
#112 - schneidend (06/29/2012) [-]
Why is it that blue names are, the vast majority of the time, the most obnoxious, ignorant niggers around? Are you kidding me? You've never seen, heard of, or met somebody who laughs too hard, loud, or long? Have you never laughed longer than another person before, or did not understand why you found something so incredibly hilarious? What kind of shut-in are you that none of these concepts have been introduced to you before? This isn't a fucking photoshop. There's nothing "fake" here for you to look cool by spotting. It's a person's laugh. I don't even like Ricky Gervais that much. I'm not defending him. Instead, I'm calling you out for the most random bout of inane drivel I have heard all day. Jesus Christ!
User avatar #98 - duchessofcorn (06/29/2012) [-]
That's not true at all
Ricky is just a very raucous person

Don't hate
#585 - Oh its obvious Goku would win. He would just go up another tie… 06/29/2012 on It's Time!!!! +6
#384 - I felt so bad for that bastard when Korra chose his brother over him. 06/27/2012 on He'll be rock hard! get it?... +2
#45 - Because it really is that simple a thought process. 06/26/2012 on so true 0
#43 - Because **** complaining about legitimate problems. 06/26/2012 on so true 0
#782 - Picture 06/26/2012 on Gore +1
#302 - Okay now, I just need you to help me up. Thanks, for marrying … 06/26/2012 on Marine proposes to girlfriend +2
#404 - Well with your track record im not sure its worth believing yo… 06/24/2012 on **Punchline** -1
#402 - The last refuge of a man with no argument or any honest way to…  [+] (2 new replies) 06/23/2012 on **Punchline** -1
#403 - anonymous (06/23/2012) [-]
"Tell me, when was the last time you heard of some guy coming home and getting high on marijuana right before beating the shit out of his wife?"
Are you implying that has never happened in the world of crime? Teach me your ways, almighty wise-ass!
"People fucking DIE addicted to cigarettes"
As opposed to heroin, meth, cocaine, steroids, LSD and morphine right?

"Well if their less harmless than whats the problem with legalizing the other More Harmless drugs?"
They're*
Then*
What do you think? I can't answer that question. Ask someone who is into drug politics a bit more.
Well, i couldn't resist making another message (obviously), but this will be last one. I feel sad for the fact that you are so extremely into this whole "mind your own business" bullshit that i'm fucking glad you're not a politician. You are corrupted, completely oblivious to how the world really works, and so ignorantly believes you are right to actually call it "enlightenment" for everyone else hearing your bullshit propaganda, absolutely left-wing extreme to the point that you don't believe that lethal drugs are victimless and also that the government should stay out of peoples business.
CONSEQUENCES: people get hurt, they die, it gets completely chaotic. A government led by people like you surely would thrive on illegal activities, and i'm ashamed to even refer to you as a fellow human being with your wretched ideals.
User avatar #404 - mexicoman (06/24/2012) [-]
Well with your track record im not sure its worth believing you Mr.Isucksatanscock, at the very least my errors don't completely contradict my statement. My damn point was that cigarettes are legal, and none of these other things are. I see you avoided my governmental arguments. Its my right to do what I want with myself and I have the right to deal with the consequences. Marijuana makes you mellow, while alcohol has the capacity to remove the fear from individuals, making some of them act on violent tendencies. But they are free to drink. Not even to mention all the prescription drug addicts that exist under their demons. I love how you like to give the graces of banning drugs to protect us, but meanwhile are ignorant to the plight of those who suffer at the hands of the drug war because these drugs are illegal. You are incapable of being changed, unlike me who is not grounded so fervently into their ideology.
#400 - Saying that government spending on prison and crime is them lo…  [+] (4 new replies) 06/21/2012 on **Punchline** 0
#401 - anonymous (06/23/2012) [-]
So, investing money and REFUSING to in ANY WAY WHATSOEVER make any sort of profit is ok? Lol. That is against all logic thinking.
"And drug crime ARE victimless crimes, what I do with my own body is no business of the government."
OH WOW! You really are believing that drug crimes are victimless? People damage their bodies, SCAR them for LIFE, with drugs, make them ADDICTED to it, wanting to have MORE of the very thing that is KILLING them, is NOT a victimless crime?
Oh, and i notice a massive bit of hypocrisy here.

"If it prolongs the process and especially if it is one that involves potential human suffering, it IS wrong. "
You seem to have no problem with human suffering, not giving a shit if people take drugs. Why would you care about human suffering in other ways?

"And if you truly believe that drug dealing is a serious offense, then go arrest the head of Budweiser and Marlboro"
Comparing beer and cigarettes to illegal and more lethal drugs. I don't know what to say. This will be my last message, because trying to have a logical debate with you is absolutely pointless.

The difference is, they're LEGAL. AND less harmless. If they truly were harming people in severe ways, i'm damn sure they would be illegal too.
But since you seem to be very enthusiastic about comparing beer and cigarettes to lethal drugs, why don't you try to take a bit of meth every day for 2 months, and see the effects compared to beer and cigarettes?

Good luck, i'm out, because trying to be logic with you is pointless.
#402 - mexicoman (06/23/2012) [-]
The last refuge of a man with no argument or any honest way to stand in a discussion, you display it in spades. Not everything is about money and standing to make a profit, the government shouldn't be most of all. Again there is a reason why the Army and police are not privatized. Tell me, when was the last time you heard of some guy coming home and getting high on marijuana right before beating the shit out of his wife? I don't need to bring up the drunk driving statistics but can you show me any substantive statistics involving a record of marijuana caused deaths? And not everybody suffers an addiction from these drugs, some of us have discipline. There are alcoholics, should we ban alcohol like we did a hundred years ago? I think we ought to be free to get addicted to things just like the free market assholes want us to be free to fail as well as succeed, if you cause a crime because it has made you dangerous THAT is when I say step in. People fucking DIE addicted to cigarettes, and they don't even get you high. The only reason those drugs are legal is because the government can't make money off of them and they can exist in American society with us still being productive little slaves for our corporate masters.

"The difference is, they're LEGAL. AND less harmless."
Well if their less harmless than whats the problem with legalizing the other More Harmless drugs? Idiot.

You sir are a cunt, you are a disingenuous drone who poses as an anon so that you don't have to wear your silly ideas on your person. I would expect nothing less from a coward such as yourself than to run from a person who can stand on their two feet. Good day to you, I hope someday you abandon your echo chamber in hopes of enlightenment away from your programmed ideology.
#403 - anonymous (06/23/2012) [-]
"Tell me, when was the last time you heard of some guy coming home and getting high on marijuana right before beating the shit out of his wife?"
Are you implying that has never happened in the world of crime? Teach me your ways, almighty wise-ass!
"People fucking DIE addicted to cigarettes"
As opposed to heroin, meth, cocaine, steroids, LSD and morphine right?

"Well if their less harmless than whats the problem with legalizing the other More Harmless drugs?"
They're*
Then*
What do you think? I can't answer that question. Ask someone who is into drug politics a bit more.
Well, i couldn't resist making another message (obviously), but this will be last one. I feel sad for the fact that you are so extremely into this whole "mind your own business" bullshit that i'm fucking glad you're not a politician. You are corrupted, completely oblivious to how the world really works, and so ignorantly believes you are right to actually call it "enlightenment" for everyone else hearing your bullshit propaganda, absolutely left-wing extreme to the point that you don't believe that lethal drugs are victimless and also that the government should stay out of peoples business.
CONSEQUENCES: people get hurt, they die, it gets completely chaotic. A government led by people like you surely would thrive on illegal activities, and i'm ashamed to even refer to you as a fellow human being with your wretched ideals.
User avatar #404 - mexicoman (06/24/2012) [-]
Well with your track record im not sure its worth believing you Mr.Isucksatanscock, at the very least my errors don't completely contradict my statement. My damn point was that cigarettes are legal, and none of these other things are. I see you avoided my governmental arguments. Its my right to do what I want with myself and I have the right to deal with the consequences. Marijuana makes you mellow, while alcohol has the capacity to remove the fear from individuals, making some of them act on violent tendencies. But they are free to drink. Not even to mention all the prescription drug addicts that exist under their demons. I love how you like to give the graces of banning drugs to protect us, but meanwhile are ignorant to the plight of those who suffer at the hands of the drug war because these drugs are illegal. You are incapable of being changed, unlike me who is not grounded so fervently into their ideology.
#398 - Okay, from what you have said I can already tell your moral st…  [+] (6 new replies) 06/21/2012 on **Punchline** 0
#399 - anonymous (06/21/2012) [-]
Oh, and what laws might that be, that makes more people get incarcerated, besides the ones who already are active since long?
"Yes it should cost millions or billions of dollars, because it is the fucking governments job to incapacitate threats to our society."

With that argument, I will no longer take you seriously, and proceed to laugh at you. You can't seriously require that the government should lose massive amounts of money because of crime activity, and refuse to make a profit of it?

"And to not care when the prison sentences are lengthened because 'they deserve it' is not only unsympathetic but also mental laziness. If I was sentenced for an unreasonable amount of time for a victimless crime or a crime under similar circumstances that show that I am not a threat to society, I will want to commit more crimes because fuck it, they already took fifteen years of life away from me and I won't be able to cope with the world now."

"If i was", "If i was", jeez, stop putting yourself in other peoples positions. Also, there's a saying for that last part of what i quoted from you, it's called "digging your own grave".

"Most of the people who are in prison are in there for selling drugs ie they don't deserve it."
So feeding people their addictions with drugs that seriously damage them doesn't count as a crime in your opinion? I also noticed you talked about victimless crimes, and don't you dare try to tell me that drug dealing is a victimless crime.

"That is an irresponsibly insane thing to say, and I think you need to spend a little more time thinking about things before typing them. "
Tell me, what is wrong with making profits in the process? Note that "the prison system should stay out of it" is NOT a valid argument.
And as i mentioned before, i will no longer take you seriously.
Also, Argumentum ad hominem. Google it.
#400 - mexicoman (06/21/2012) [-]
Saying that government spending on prison and crime is them losing money is just like saying that investing the money needed to fund an army is losing money. They are both primal functions of the government. It is the government that organizes the judges, juries, executioners, and police. You still want the government to pay these private prisons to hold onto our criminals. And drug crime ARE victimless crimes, what I do with my own body is no business of the government. You don't fucking know better than me what I want/need, so leave my liberties alone. If my addiction has gotten so bad that I am breaking into cars for drug money, then arrest me for breaking into the damn cars. The only thing drug laws do is make it so that good people are put in prison for an unreasonable amount of time, which is what they want. And if you truly believe that drug dealing is a serious offense, then go arrest the head of Budweiser and Marlboro because they have been objectively responsible for more deaths than any street dealer ever has. If you can't see the problem there, there is no helping you, for you have sworn some misguided allegiance to the worst people among us in the private industry. And you did not truly respond to the second paragraph you quoted from me, only to insult my manner of making the argument.

"Tell me, what is wrong with making profits in the process?"
If it prolongs the process and especially if it is one that involves potential human suffering, it IS wrong.
#401 - anonymous (06/23/2012) [-]
So, investing money and REFUSING to in ANY WAY WHATSOEVER make any sort of profit is ok? Lol. That is against all logic thinking.
"And drug crime ARE victimless crimes, what I do with my own body is no business of the government."
OH WOW! You really are believing that drug crimes are victimless? People damage their bodies, SCAR them for LIFE, with drugs, make them ADDICTED to it, wanting to have MORE of the very thing that is KILLING them, is NOT a victimless crime?
Oh, and i notice a massive bit of hypocrisy here.

"If it prolongs the process and especially if it is one that involves potential human suffering, it IS wrong. "
You seem to have no problem with human suffering, not giving a shit if people take drugs. Why would you care about human suffering in other ways?

"And if you truly believe that drug dealing is a serious offense, then go arrest the head of Budweiser and Marlboro"
Comparing beer and cigarettes to illegal and more lethal drugs. I don't know what to say. This will be my last message, because trying to have a logical debate with you is absolutely pointless.

The difference is, they're LEGAL. AND less harmless. If they truly were harming people in severe ways, i'm damn sure they would be illegal too.
But since you seem to be very enthusiastic about comparing beer and cigarettes to lethal drugs, why don't you try to take a bit of meth every day for 2 months, and see the effects compared to beer and cigarettes?

Good luck, i'm out, because trying to be logic with you is pointless.
#402 - mexicoman (06/23/2012) [-]
The last refuge of a man with no argument or any honest way to stand in a discussion, you display it in spades. Not everything is about money and standing to make a profit, the government shouldn't be most of all. Again there is a reason why the Army and police are not privatized. Tell me, when was the last time you heard of some guy coming home and getting high on marijuana right before beating the shit out of his wife? I don't need to bring up the drunk driving statistics but can you show me any substantive statistics involving a record of marijuana caused deaths? And not everybody suffers an addiction from these drugs, some of us have discipline. There are alcoholics, should we ban alcohol like we did a hundred years ago? I think we ought to be free to get addicted to things just like the free market assholes want us to be free to fail as well as succeed, if you cause a crime because it has made you dangerous THAT is when I say step in. People fucking DIE addicted to cigarettes, and they don't even get you high. The only reason those drugs are legal is because the government can't make money off of them and they can exist in American society with us still being productive little slaves for our corporate masters.

"The difference is, they're LEGAL. AND less harmless."
Well if their less harmless than whats the problem with legalizing the other More Harmless drugs? Idiot.

You sir are a cunt, you are a disingenuous drone who poses as an anon so that you don't have to wear your silly ideas on your person. I would expect nothing less from a coward such as yourself than to run from a person who can stand on their two feet. Good day to you, I hope someday you abandon your echo chamber in hopes of enlightenment away from your programmed ideology.
#403 - anonymous (06/23/2012) [-]
"Tell me, when was the last time you heard of some guy coming home and getting high on marijuana right before beating the shit out of his wife?"
Are you implying that has never happened in the world of crime? Teach me your ways, almighty wise-ass!
"People fucking DIE addicted to cigarettes"
As opposed to heroin, meth, cocaine, steroids, LSD and morphine right?

"Well if their less harmless than whats the problem with legalizing the other More Harmless drugs?"
They're*
Then*
What do you think? I can't answer that question. Ask someone who is into drug politics a bit more.
Well, i couldn't resist making another message (obviously), but this will be last one. I feel sad for the fact that you are so extremely into this whole "mind your own business" bullshit that i'm fucking glad you're not a politician. You are corrupted, completely oblivious to how the world really works, and so ignorantly believes you are right to actually call it "enlightenment" for everyone else hearing your bullshit propaganda, absolutely left-wing extreme to the point that you don't believe that lethal drugs are victimless and also that the government should stay out of peoples business.
CONSEQUENCES: people get hurt, they die, it gets completely chaotic. A government led by people like you surely would thrive on illegal activities, and i'm ashamed to even refer to you as a fellow human being with your wretched ideals.
User avatar #404 - mexicoman (06/24/2012) [-]
Well with your track record im not sure its worth believing you Mr.Isucksatanscock, at the very least my errors don't completely contradict my statement. My damn point was that cigarettes are legal, and none of these other things are. I see you avoided my governmental arguments. Its my right to do what I want with myself and I have the right to deal with the consequences. Marijuana makes you mellow, while alcohol has the capacity to remove the fear from individuals, making some of them act on violent tendencies. But they are free to drink. Not even to mention all the prescription drug addicts that exist under their demons. I love how you like to give the graces of banning drugs to protect us, but meanwhile are ignorant to the plight of those who suffer at the hands of the drug war because these drugs are illegal. You are incapable of being changed, unlike me who is not grounded so fervently into their ideology.

items

Total unique items point value: 2050 / Total items point value: 2500
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #3 - soundofwinter ONLINE (06/27/2014) [-]
**** you
User avatar #2 - sirbonzaiatak (03/25/2011) [-]
LMAO at your post!!! Check out mine and thumb please :)

http://funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/1869232/Weekly+Funny+1/
User avatar #1 - iMJesus (03/11/2011) [-]
Lmfao at your post bro, thumbed up, can you thumb this up for me?
http://www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/1796542/Epic+Breakup/
 Friends (0)