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

hide menu

nickmandemon

no avatar Level 177 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Offline
Send mail to nickmandemon Block nickmandemon Invite nickmandemon to be your friend
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Age: 29
Date Signed Up:7/06/2009
Last Login:9/09/2014
Location:connecticut
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Thumbs: 865 total,  1407 ,  542
Content Level Progress: 6.77% (4/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 40% (4/10)
Level 177 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk → Level 178 Comments: Soldier Of Funnyjunk
Subscribers:0
Total Comments Made:395
FJ Points:772

latest user's comments

#429 - "no need to be pissed" well don't say there is somet…  [+] (3 new replies) 07/17/2013 on Im Pissed Off 0
User avatar #432 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
half a person was a simple over exaggeration of how 1 millionth was going to be an extremely small fraction of the black population. there obviously isn't just 500,000 black people in the US.
and i said if you think it is 40 then there is something wrong with you, and right now you just said you know it isn't just 40. So, then that statement(insult) doesn't even apply to you.
now, it seems like it is a lot of black people who pull the race card(not this rioting thing, i hope you weren't thinking i was saying a lot of black people riot), don't know if you got the other message where i said a lot doesn't necessarily mean a significant amount.
#436 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
You shouldn't have assumed that I thought that it was only 40 people. That was an idiotic assumption because i did not say that in any way. Saying that a lot of black people are rioting or pull the race card just doesn't sound right. That's still generalizing by putting people into groups. Black people aren't the ones who do this (although there are black people who do) there are plenty of people of other races who do this as well. So the group we should be talking about is a group called "over sensitive idiots" which includes over sensitive idiots from every race. Thank you for understanding. I don't know why people have to argue with me for trying to be fair to everyone.
User avatar #437 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
the way i was putting it may have sounded like an assumption but it no way did i really mean that you actually think it was 40. i was very unclear with this and i apologize.
i was also never trying to say that black people were the only ones that riot(just that it feels like a lot of black people pull the race card, which is a completely separate thing from rioting). like you said it's just a bunch of over sensitive idiots from all backgrounds.
again, sorry if i may have come off as ignorant.
#340 - I knew that one millionth was not a completely accurate fracti… 07/17/2013 on Im Pissed Off 0
#336 - Yeah i could have guessed you would respond with a dumbass arg…  [+] (6 new replies) 07/17/2013 on Im Pissed Off 0
User avatar #419 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
on a side note
a lot doesn't necessarily mean a significant amount.
10% of 100,000,000 is ten million. that is a lot but not a significant amount. hoping this may have cleared things up. sorry if i came off as ignorant.
User avatar #356 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
i have no idea where you are getting these numbers from
obviously 40 was an example trying to express how little of the black population in the US is one of these stupid stereotyped people.
but again, it seems like it is a lot more than that.
no need to be pissed.
#429 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
"no need to be pissed" well don't say there is something wrong with me for something i didn't even say. And no. You're still a simpleton. The number 40 WAS NOT and example trying to express how little people did this. 40 is one millionth of the black population in America. I was only trying to say that it wasn't half a person. So please stop using that as a pathetic argument. The number of black people doing this was the vast minority of the population. Not once did i say it was only 40 people. Once again, please learn how to read, it will help you in life.
User avatar #432 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
half a person was a simple over exaggeration of how 1 millionth was going to be an extremely small fraction of the black population. there obviously isn't just 500,000 black people in the US.
and i said if you think it is 40 then there is something wrong with you, and right now you just said you know it isn't just 40. So, then that statement(insult) doesn't even apply to you.
now, it seems like it is a lot of black people who pull the race card(not this rioting thing, i hope you weren't thinking i was saying a lot of black people riot), don't know if you got the other message where i said a lot doesn't necessarily mean a significant amount.
#436 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
You shouldn't have assumed that I thought that it was only 40 people. That was an idiotic assumption because i did not say that in any way. Saying that a lot of black people are rioting or pull the race card just doesn't sound right. That's still generalizing by putting people into groups. Black people aren't the ones who do this (although there are black people who do) there are plenty of people of other races who do this as well. So the group we should be talking about is a group called "over sensitive idiots" which includes over sensitive idiots from every race. Thank you for understanding. I don't know why people have to argue with me for trying to be fair to everyone.
User avatar #437 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
the way i was putting it may have sounded like an assumption but it no way did i really mean that you actually think it was 40. i was very unclear with this and i apologize.
i was also never trying to say that black people were the only ones that riot(just that it feels like a lot of black people pull the race card, which is a completely separate thing from rioting). like you said it's just a bunch of over sensitive idiots from all backgrounds.
again, sorry if i may have come off as ignorant.
#332 - No, you're still not understanding. like i said, its all about…  [+] (4 new replies) 07/17/2013 on Im Pissed Off 0
User avatar #342 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
except im not and your just as stubborn you proved that you canuse your own brain to make assumptions using logic thats how it should be you take the information given to you then based on your own knowledge make an assumption on whats actually going on. you know all black people are not rioting yet you had to make point that because op said black people are rioting hes an uneducated idiot who truly believes all black people in america are rioting right now. if he had said all black people that would make sense but he didnt he said black people
#435 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's still both morally, and grammatically wrong to just say "black people are rioting". Go hand in a paper to an english teacher with a generalized statement like that, and they would say be more specific. And for you're information, I do know whats actually going on. I'm not saying this post made me think that all black people were rioting. Theres just enough practically anti-black posts on the front page recently that I assumed he was jumping on the bandwagon with everyone else. That, is using context clues. You're childish example of "oh derp there's black people outside my house" is completely different. And you keep saying i think he was talking about every last fucking black person. I didn't say that. you're being a stubborn child. I meant that he was talking about black people as a whole. I honestly hate arguing with little brats like you. You come up with the weakest, least fluent arguments ever and you think that they're golden, and that you could never possibly be wrong. Please. Stop.
User avatar #440 - sketchE (07/18/2013) [-]
if your not saying he meant that then why even bring it up?
#444 - nickmandemon (07/18/2013) [-]
If you read it again, you would see that i said he was referring to black people as a whole.
#304 - Ok. Was I supposed to use my Prof. Xavier powers to read your …  [+] (6 new replies) 07/17/2013 on Im Pissed Off 0
User avatar #307 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
no i never expected you to know everything about me i was making a general point. basicly what your saying is if i said black people are outside my house right now you would assume all of them becaus i didnt specify how many or what type. like you said you can use black as an identifier for a male im using it on a larger scale and saying black people as in a group of black people or the black people rioting as this post was talking about
#332 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
No, you're still not understanding. like i said, its all about context. In that context, of course i wouldn't assume all the black people in america were outside your house because theres just not enough room. thats a really dumb example and it kind of shows how stubborn you're being. When you just say black people are rioting about a nationally famous case, then, it seems like you mean the majority of them. Just stop arguing with me about this. You're wrong, accept it and learn.
User avatar #342 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
except im not and your just as stubborn you proved that you canuse your own brain to make assumptions using logic thats how it should be you take the information given to you then based on your own knowledge make an assumption on whats actually going on. you know all black people are not rioting yet you had to make point that because op said black people are rioting hes an uneducated idiot who truly believes all black people in america are rioting right now. if he had said all black people that would make sense but he didnt he said black people
#435 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's still both morally, and grammatically wrong to just say "black people are rioting". Go hand in a paper to an english teacher with a generalized statement like that, and they would say be more specific. And for you're information, I do know whats actually going on. I'm not saying this post made me think that all black people were rioting. Theres just enough practically anti-black posts on the front page recently that I assumed he was jumping on the bandwagon with everyone else. That, is using context clues. You're childish example of "oh derp there's black people outside my house" is completely different. And you keep saying i think he was talking about every last fucking black person. I didn't say that. you're being a stubborn child. I meant that he was talking about black people as a whole. I honestly hate arguing with little brats like you. You come up with the weakest, least fluent arguments ever and you think that they're golden, and that you could never possibly be wrong. Please. Stop.
User avatar #440 - sketchE (07/18/2013) [-]
if your not saying he meant that then why even bring it up?
#444 - nickmandemon (07/18/2013) [-]
If you read it again, you would see that i said he was referring to black people as a whole.
#294 - "narrow minded"? So you're saying that if i can't di…  [+] (8 new replies) 07/17/2013 on Im Pissed Off +1
User avatar #301 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
regardless of my veiws yo should assume that. when is the last time you saw someone say black people and they meant every last one of them. i dont know a single person without one black friend and i live in alaska. even the most redneck racist person i know.
#304 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
Ok. Was I supposed to use my Prof. Xavier powers to read your mind from across the country to know about your background? And usually when people just say "black people" without any other indicator of separating that term from the entire race, they do mean all of them. So maybe you should just stop. I don't think I'm the retarded one here.
User avatar #307 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
no i never expected you to know everything about me i was making a general point. basicly what your saying is if i said black people are outside my house right now you would assume all of them becaus i didnt specify how many or what type. like you said you can use black as an identifier for a male im using it on a larger scale and saying black people as in a group of black people or the black people rioting as this post was talking about
#332 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
No, you're still not understanding. like i said, its all about context. In that context, of course i wouldn't assume all the black people in america were outside your house because theres just not enough room. thats a really dumb example and it kind of shows how stubborn you're being. When you just say black people are rioting about a nationally famous case, then, it seems like you mean the majority of them. Just stop arguing with me about this. You're wrong, accept it and learn.
User avatar #342 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
except im not and your just as stubborn you proved that you canuse your own brain to make assumptions using logic thats how it should be you take the information given to you then based on your own knowledge make an assumption on whats actually going on. you know all black people are not rioting yet you had to make point that because op said black people are rioting hes an uneducated idiot who truly believes all black people in america are rioting right now. if he had said all black people that would make sense but he didnt he said black people
#435 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's still both morally, and grammatically wrong to just say "black people are rioting". Go hand in a paper to an english teacher with a generalized statement like that, and they would say be more specific. And for you're information, I do know whats actually going on. I'm not saying this post made me think that all black people were rioting. Theres just enough practically anti-black posts on the front page recently that I assumed he was jumping on the bandwagon with everyone else. That, is using context clues. You're childish example of "oh derp there's black people outside my house" is completely different. And you keep saying i think he was talking about every last fucking black person. I didn't say that. you're being a stubborn child. I meant that he was talking about black people as a whole. I honestly hate arguing with little brats like you. You come up with the weakest, least fluent arguments ever and you think that they're golden, and that you could never possibly be wrong. Please. Stop.
User avatar #440 - sketchE (07/18/2013) [-]
if your not saying he meant that then why even bring it up?
#444 - nickmandemon (07/18/2013) [-]
If you read it again, you would see that i said he was referring to black people as a whole.
#288 - It's all about context. When you say "black people are ri…  [+] (10 new replies) 07/17/2013 on Im Pissed Off 0
User avatar #291 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
if you are so narrow minded to think that when i say black people i mean all of them you are simply retarded
#294 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
"narrow minded"? So you're saying that if i can't discern what a total stranger means with a completely vague term that I'm retarded? You could be a fucking skinhead nazi for all I know. (not saying you are, please don't go back to that as some sort of pathetic argument against me) Sorry just because you don't want to be wrong doesn't make me retarded.
User avatar #301 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
regardless of my veiws yo should assume that. when is the last time you saw someone say black people and they meant every last one of them. i dont know a single person without one black friend and i live in alaska. even the most redneck racist person i know.
#304 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
Ok. Was I supposed to use my Prof. Xavier powers to read your mind from across the country to know about your background? And usually when people just say "black people" without any other indicator of separating that term from the entire race, they do mean all of them. So maybe you should just stop. I don't think I'm the retarded one here.
User avatar #307 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
no i never expected you to know everything about me i was making a general point. basicly what your saying is if i said black people are outside my house right now you would assume all of them becaus i didnt specify how many or what type. like you said you can use black as an identifier for a male im using it on a larger scale and saying black people as in a group of black people or the black people rioting as this post was talking about
#332 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
No, you're still not understanding. like i said, its all about context. In that context, of course i wouldn't assume all the black people in america were outside your house because theres just not enough room. thats a really dumb example and it kind of shows how stubborn you're being. When you just say black people are rioting about a nationally famous case, then, it seems like you mean the majority of them. Just stop arguing with me about this. You're wrong, accept it and learn.
User avatar #342 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
except im not and your just as stubborn you proved that you canuse your own brain to make assumptions using logic thats how it should be you take the information given to you then based on your own knowledge make an assumption on whats actually going on. you know all black people are not rioting yet you had to make point that because op said black people are rioting hes an uneducated idiot who truly believes all black people in america are rioting right now. if he had said all black people that would make sense but he didnt he said black people
#435 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's still both morally, and grammatically wrong to just say "black people are rioting". Go hand in a paper to an english teacher with a generalized statement like that, and they would say be more specific. And for you're information, I do know whats actually going on. I'm not saying this post made me think that all black people were rioting. Theres just enough practically anti-black posts on the front page recently that I assumed he was jumping on the bandwagon with everyone else. That, is using context clues. You're childish example of "oh derp there's black people outside my house" is completely different. And you keep saying i think he was talking about every last fucking black person. I didn't say that. you're being a stubborn child. I meant that he was talking about black people as a whole. I honestly hate arguing with little brats like you. You come up with the weakest, least fluent arguments ever and you think that they're golden, and that you could never possibly be wrong. Please. Stop.
User avatar #440 - sketchE (07/18/2013) [-]
if your not saying he meant that then why even bring it up?
#444 - nickmandemon (07/18/2013) [-]
If you read it again, you would see that i said he was referring to black people as a whole.
#274 - It's very simple. You say "stupid people" are riotin…  [+] (12 new replies) 07/17/2013 on Im Pissed Off 0
User avatar #281 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
im sorry but thats dumb. its like saying when an apb goes out for a black male its racist even though there is video proof of it being a black male. no one said theyre rioting because theyre black im saying people are rioting these people also are black
#288 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's all about context. When you say "black people are rioting" no one knows if you're talking about all of them or some of them. Do I have to give you an English lesson right here? When a black male is being searched for its perfectly fine to say that. It's a distinguishing physical characteristic that helps people catch who they're looking for. It's so they don't search for someone when they don't know what they look like. how dumb would it be if the police were looking for a robber who they knew was black and they ended up searching a bunch of white guys? When you use it in a case like this though, it creates confusion because you're either being racist, or vague. You could at least say "Stupid black people" if you really want to mention that they're black so bad.
User avatar #291 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
if you are so narrow minded to think that when i say black people i mean all of them you are simply retarded
#294 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
"narrow minded"? So you're saying that if i can't discern what a total stranger means with a completely vague term that I'm retarded? You could be a fucking skinhead nazi for all I know. (not saying you are, please don't go back to that as some sort of pathetic argument against me) Sorry just because you don't want to be wrong doesn't make me retarded.
User avatar #301 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
regardless of my veiws yo should assume that. when is the last time you saw someone say black people and they meant every last one of them. i dont know a single person without one black friend and i live in alaska. even the most redneck racist person i know.
#304 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
Ok. Was I supposed to use my Prof. Xavier powers to read your mind from across the country to know about your background? And usually when people just say "black people" without any other indicator of separating that term from the entire race, they do mean all of them. So maybe you should just stop. I don't think I'm the retarded one here.
User avatar #307 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
no i never expected you to know everything about me i was making a general point. basicly what your saying is if i said black people are outside my house right now you would assume all of them becaus i didnt specify how many or what type. like you said you can use black as an identifier for a male im using it on a larger scale and saying black people as in a group of black people or the black people rioting as this post was talking about
#332 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
No, you're still not understanding. like i said, its all about context. In that context, of course i wouldn't assume all the black people in america were outside your house because theres just not enough room. thats a really dumb example and it kind of shows how stubborn you're being. When you just say black people are rioting about a nationally famous case, then, it seems like you mean the majority of them. Just stop arguing with me about this. You're wrong, accept it and learn.
User avatar #342 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
except im not and your just as stubborn you proved that you canuse your own brain to make assumptions using logic thats how it should be you take the information given to you then based on your own knowledge make an assumption on whats actually going on. you know all black people are not rioting yet you had to make point that because op said black people are rioting hes an uneducated idiot who truly believes all black people in america are rioting right now. if he had said all black people that would make sense but he didnt he said black people
#435 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's still both morally, and grammatically wrong to just say "black people are rioting". Go hand in a paper to an english teacher with a generalized statement like that, and they would say be more specific. And for you're information, I do know whats actually going on. I'm not saying this post made me think that all black people were rioting. Theres just enough practically anti-black posts on the front page recently that I assumed he was jumping on the bandwagon with everyone else. That, is using context clues. You're childish example of "oh derp there's black people outside my house" is completely different. And you keep saying i think he was talking about every last fucking black person. I didn't say that. you're being a stubborn child. I meant that he was talking about black people as a whole. I honestly hate arguing with little brats like you. You come up with the weakest, least fluent arguments ever and you think that they're golden, and that you could never possibly be wrong. Please. Stop.
User avatar #440 - sketchE (07/18/2013) [-]
if your not saying he meant that then why even bring it up?
#444 - nickmandemon (07/18/2013) [-]
If you read it again, you would see that i said he was referring to black people as a whole.
#267 - Ok I honestly didn't actually just go and do research on this …  [+] (9 new replies) 07/17/2013 on Im Pissed Off 0
User avatar #331 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
if you think it is only 40 then there is something wrong with you. like i said, its not all, its not most, but it seems like a lot.
#340 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
I knew that one millionth was not a completely accurate fraction from the second i said it. It was off the top of my head. I was just proving to you that it wasn't half a person.
#336 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
Yeah i could have guessed you would respond with a dumbass argument like that. Obviously i know its not 40. I didn't even say it was 40. Learn how to read please. I said not to far off in the fraction. It would be closer to about 100,000th of the black people in america, which is still the vast minority, you fucking simpleton.
User avatar #419 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
on a side note
a lot doesn't necessarily mean a significant amount.
10% of 100,000,000 is ten million. that is a lot but not a significant amount. hoping this may have cleared things up. sorry if i came off as ignorant.
User avatar #356 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
i have no idea where you are getting these numbers from
obviously 40 was an example trying to express how little of the black population in the US is one of these stupid stereotyped people.
but again, it seems like it is a lot more than that.
no need to be pissed.
#429 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
"no need to be pissed" well don't say there is something wrong with me for something i didn't even say. And no. You're still a simpleton. The number 40 WAS NOT and example trying to express how little people did this. 40 is one millionth of the black population in America. I was only trying to say that it wasn't half a person. So please stop using that as a pathetic argument. The number of black people doing this was the vast minority of the population. Not once did i say it was only 40 people. Once again, please learn how to read, it will help you in life.
User avatar #432 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
half a person was a simple over exaggeration of how 1 millionth was going to be an extremely small fraction of the black population. there obviously isn't just 500,000 black people in the US.
and i said if you think it is 40 then there is something wrong with you, and right now you just said you know it isn't just 40. So, then that statement(insult) doesn't even apply to you.
now, it seems like it is a lot of black people who pull the race card(not this rioting thing, i hope you weren't thinking i was saying a lot of black people riot), don't know if you got the other message where i said a lot doesn't necessarily mean a significant amount.
#436 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
You shouldn't have assumed that I thought that it was only 40 people. That was an idiotic assumption because i did not say that in any way. Saying that a lot of black people are rioting or pull the race card just doesn't sound right. That's still generalizing by putting people into groups. Black people aren't the ones who do this (although there are black people who do) there are plenty of people of other races who do this as well. So the group we should be talking about is a group called "over sensitive idiots" which includes over sensitive idiots from every race. Thank you for understanding. I don't know why people have to argue with me for trying to be fair to everyone.
User avatar #437 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
the way i was putting it may have sounded like an assumption but it no way did i really mean that you actually think it was 40. i was very unclear with this and i apologize.
i was also never trying to say that black people were the only ones that riot(just that it feels like a lot of black people pull the race card, which is a completely separate thing from rioting). like you said it's just a bunch of over sensitive idiots from all backgrounds.
again, sorry if i may have come off as ignorant.
#257 - A lot in what context though? You say a lot, I say less than l…  [+] (26 new replies) 07/17/2013 on Im Pissed Off +1
User avatar #268 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
basicly whos doing the rioting? were not lumping them all into one catagory but when i say black people are making this into a big deal how else can i put it? i know its not all o them but a number of people who happen to be black are doing it
#274 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's very simple. You say "stupid people" are rioting. Not "Black people". Because they aren't rioting because their black, otherwise every black person would, it's because they're stupid.
User avatar #281 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
im sorry but thats dumb. its like saying when an apb goes out for a black male its racist even though there is video proof of it being a black male. no one said theyre rioting because theyre black im saying people are rioting these people also are black
#288 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's all about context. When you say "black people are rioting" no one knows if you're talking about all of them or some of them. Do I have to give you an English lesson right here? When a black male is being searched for its perfectly fine to say that. It's a distinguishing physical characteristic that helps people catch who they're looking for. It's so they don't search for someone when they don't know what they look like. how dumb would it be if the police were looking for a robber who they knew was black and they ended up searching a bunch of white guys? When you use it in a case like this though, it creates confusion because you're either being racist, or vague. You could at least say "Stupid black people" if you really want to mention that they're black so bad.
User avatar #291 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
if you are so narrow minded to think that when i say black people i mean all of them you are simply retarded
#294 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
"narrow minded"? So you're saying that if i can't discern what a total stranger means with a completely vague term that I'm retarded? You could be a fucking skinhead nazi for all I know. (not saying you are, please don't go back to that as some sort of pathetic argument against me) Sorry just because you don't want to be wrong doesn't make me retarded.
User avatar #301 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
regardless of my veiws yo should assume that. when is the last time you saw someone say black people and they meant every last one of them. i dont know a single person without one black friend and i live in alaska. even the most redneck racist person i know.
#304 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
Ok. Was I supposed to use my Prof. Xavier powers to read your mind from across the country to know about your background? And usually when people just say "black people" without any other indicator of separating that term from the entire race, they do mean all of them. So maybe you should just stop. I don't think I'm the retarded one here.
User avatar #307 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
no i never expected you to know everything about me i was making a general point. basicly what your saying is if i said black people are outside my house right now you would assume all of them becaus i didnt specify how many or what type. like you said you can use black as an identifier for a male im using it on a larger scale and saying black people as in a group of black people or the black people rioting as this post was talking about
#332 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
No, you're still not understanding. like i said, its all about context. In that context, of course i wouldn't assume all the black people in america were outside your house because theres just not enough room. thats a really dumb example and it kind of shows how stubborn you're being. When you just say black people are rioting about a nationally famous case, then, it seems like you mean the majority of them. Just stop arguing with me about this. You're wrong, accept it and learn.
User avatar #342 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
except im not and your just as stubborn you proved that you canuse your own brain to make assumptions using logic thats how it should be you take the information given to you then based on your own knowledge make an assumption on whats actually going on. you know all black people are not rioting yet you had to make point that because op said black people are rioting hes an uneducated idiot who truly believes all black people in america are rioting right now. if he had said all black people that would make sense but he didnt he said black people
#435 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's still both morally, and grammatically wrong to just say "black people are rioting". Go hand in a paper to an english teacher with a generalized statement like that, and they would say be more specific. And for you're information, I do know whats actually going on. I'm not saying this post made me think that all black people were rioting. Theres just enough practically anti-black posts on the front page recently that I assumed he was jumping on the bandwagon with everyone else. That, is using context clues. You're childish example of "oh derp there's black people outside my house" is completely different. And you keep saying i think he was talking about every last fucking black person. I didn't say that. you're being a stubborn child. I meant that he was talking about black people as a whole. I honestly hate arguing with little brats like you. You come up with the weakest, least fluent arguments ever and you think that they're golden, and that you could never possibly be wrong. Please. Stop.
User avatar #440 - sketchE (07/18/2013) [-]
if your not saying he meant that then why even bring it up?
#444 - nickmandemon (07/18/2013) [-]
If you read it again, you would see that i said he was referring to black people as a whole.
User avatar #260 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
that's like half a person.
idk what % but it seems like it is a nice portion of black people.
#267 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
Ok I honestly didn't actually just go and do research on this because i don't feel the need to do research just to prove some guy on funnyjunk wrong. But if you really want to know one millionth of the black population in america is about 40. So it's really not that far off. And if you think that that is a significant portion, then you can't math, sorry.
User avatar #331 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
if you think it is only 40 then there is something wrong with you. like i said, its not all, its not most, but it seems like a lot.
#340 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
I knew that one millionth was not a completely accurate fraction from the second i said it. It was off the top of my head. I was just proving to you that it wasn't half a person.
#336 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
Yeah i could have guessed you would respond with a dumbass argument like that. Obviously i know its not 40. I didn't even say it was 40. Learn how to read please. I said not to far off in the fraction. It would be closer to about 100,000th of the black people in america, which is still the vast minority, you fucking simpleton.
User avatar #419 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
on a side note
a lot doesn't necessarily mean a significant amount.
10% of 100,000,000 is ten million. that is a lot but not a significant amount. hoping this may have cleared things up. sorry if i came off as ignorant.
User avatar #356 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
i have no idea where you are getting these numbers from
obviously 40 was an example trying to express how little of the black population in the US is one of these stupid stereotyped people.
but again, it seems like it is a lot more than that.
no need to be pissed.
#429 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
"no need to be pissed" well don't say there is something wrong with me for something i didn't even say. And no. You're still a simpleton. The number 40 WAS NOT and example trying to express how little people did this. 40 is one millionth of the black population in America. I was only trying to say that it wasn't half a person. So please stop using that as a pathetic argument. The number of black people doing this was the vast minority of the population. Not once did i say it was only 40 people. Once again, please learn how to read, it will help you in life.
User avatar #432 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
half a person was a simple over exaggeration of how 1 millionth was going to be an extremely small fraction of the black population. there obviously isn't just 500,000 black people in the US.
and i said if you think it is 40 then there is something wrong with you, and right now you just said you know it isn't just 40. So, then that statement(insult) doesn't even apply to you.
now, it seems like it is a lot of black people who pull the race card(not this rioting thing, i hope you weren't thinking i was saying a lot of black people riot), don't know if you got the other message where i said a lot doesn't necessarily mean a significant amount.
#436 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
You shouldn't have assumed that I thought that it was only 40 people. That was an idiotic assumption because i did not say that in any way. Saying that a lot of black people are rioting or pull the race card just doesn't sound right. That's still generalizing by putting people into groups. Black people aren't the ones who do this (although there are black people who do) there are plenty of people of other races who do this as well. So the group we should be talking about is a group called "over sensitive idiots" which includes over sensitive idiots from every race. Thank you for understanding. I don't know why people have to argue with me for trying to be fair to everyone.
User avatar #437 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
the way i was putting it may have sounded like an assumption but it no way did i really mean that you actually think it was 40. i was very unclear with this and i apologize.
i was also never trying to say that black people were the only ones that riot(just that it feels like a lot of black people pull the race card, which is a completely separate thing from rioting). like you said it's just a bunch of over sensitive idiots from all backgrounds.
again, sorry if i may have come off as ignorant.
#265 - articulate (07/17/2013) [-]
Things are rarely what they seem.
#254 - .... I'm not sure what you're trying to correct there sir. I h…  [+] (28 new replies) 07/17/2013 on Im Pissed Off +2
User avatar #255 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
i'm not correcting you, i'm correcting the posts statement.
it is not ALL black people, but A LOT of them.
#257 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
A lot in what context though? You say a lot, I say less than like 1 millionth of the black population.
User avatar #268 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
basicly whos doing the rioting? were not lumping them all into one catagory but when i say black people are making this into a big deal how else can i put it? i know its not all o them but a number of people who happen to be black are doing it
#274 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's very simple. You say "stupid people" are rioting. Not "Black people". Because they aren't rioting because their black, otherwise every black person would, it's because they're stupid.
User avatar #281 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
im sorry but thats dumb. its like saying when an apb goes out for a black male its racist even though there is video proof of it being a black male. no one said theyre rioting because theyre black im saying people are rioting these people also are black
#288 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's all about context. When you say "black people are rioting" no one knows if you're talking about all of them or some of them. Do I have to give you an English lesson right here? When a black male is being searched for its perfectly fine to say that. It's a distinguishing physical characteristic that helps people catch who they're looking for. It's so they don't search for someone when they don't know what they look like. how dumb would it be if the police were looking for a robber who they knew was black and they ended up searching a bunch of white guys? When you use it in a case like this though, it creates confusion because you're either being racist, or vague. You could at least say "Stupid black people" if you really want to mention that they're black so bad.
User avatar #291 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
if you are so narrow minded to think that when i say black people i mean all of them you are simply retarded
#294 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
"narrow minded"? So you're saying that if i can't discern what a total stranger means with a completely vague term that I'm retarded? You could be a fucking skinhead nazi for all I know. (not saying you are, please don't go back to that as some sort of pathetic argument against me) Sorry just because you don't want to be wrong doesn't make me retarded.
User avatar #301 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
regardless of my veiws yo should assume that. when is the last time you saw someone say black people and they meant every last one of them. i dont know a single person without one black friend and i live in alaska. even the most redneck racist person i know.
#304 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
Ok. Was I supposed to use my Prof. Xavier powers to read your mind from across the country to know about your background? And usually when people just say "black people" without any other indicator of separating that term from the entire race, they do mean all of them. So maybe you should just stop. I don't think I'm the retarded one here.
User avatar #307 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
no i never expected you to know everything about me i was making a general point. basicly what your saying is if i said black people are outside my house right now you would assume all of them becaus i didnt specify how many or what type. like you said you can use black as an identifier for a male im using it on a larger scale and saying black people as in a group of black people or the black people rioting as this post was talking about
#332 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
No, you're still not understanding. like i said, its all about context. In that context, of course i wouldn't assume all the black people in america were outside your house because theres just not enough room. thats a really dumb example and it kind of shows how stubborn you're being. When you just say black people are rioting about a nationally famous case, then, it seems like you mean the majority of them. Just stop arguing with me about this. You're wrong, accept it and learn.
User avatar #342 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
except im not and your just as stubborn you proved that you canuse your own brain to make assumptions using logic thats how it should be you take the information given to you then based on your own knowledge make an assumption on whats actually going on. you know all black people are not rioting yet you had to make point that because op said black people are rioting hes an uneducated idiot who truly believes all black people in america are rioting right now. if he had said all black people that would make sense but he didnt he said black people
#435 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's still both morally, and grammatically wrong to just say "black people are rioting". Go hand in a paper to an english teacher with a generalized statement like that, and they would say be more specific. And for you're information, I do know whats actually going on. I'm not saying this post made me think that all black people were rioting. Theres just enough practically anti-black posts on the front page recently that I assumed he was jumping on the bandwagon with everyone else. That, is using context clues. You're childish example of "oh derp there's black people outside my house" is completely different. And you keep saying i think he was talking about every last fucking black person. I didn't say that. you're being a stubborn child. I meant that he was talking about black people as a whole. I honestly hate arguing with little brats like you. You come up with the weakest, least fluent arguments ever and you think that they're golden, and that you could never possibly be wrong. Please. Stop.
User avatar #440 - sketchE (07/18/2013) [-]
if your not saying he meant that then why even bring it up?
#444 - nickmandemon (07/18/2013) [-]
If you read it again, you would see that i said he was referring to black people as a whole.
User avatar #260 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
that's like half a person.
idk what % but it seems like it is a nice portion of black people.
#267 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
Ok I honestly didn't actually just go and do research on this because i don't feel the need to do research just to prove some guy on funnyjunk wrong. But if you really want to know one millionth of the black population in america is about 40. So it's really not that far off. And if you think that that is a significant portion, then you can't math, sorry.
User avatar #331 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
if you think it is only 40 then there is something wrong with you. like i said, its not all, its not most, but it seems like a lot.
#340 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
I knew that one millionth was not a completely accurate fraction from the second i said it. It was off the top of my head. I was just proving to you that it wasn't half a person.
#336 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
Yeah i could have guessed you would respond with a dumbass argument like that. Obviously i know its not 40. I didn't even say it was 40. Learn how to read please. I said not to far off in the fraction. It would be closer to about 100,000th of the black people in america, which is still the vast minority, you fucking simpleton.
User avatar #419 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
on a side note
a lot doesn't necessarily mean a significant amount.
10% of 100,000,000 is ten million. that is a lot but not a significant amount. hoping this may have cleared things up. sorry if i came off as ignorant.
User avatar #356 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
i have no idea where you are getting these numbers from
obviously 40 was an example trying to express how little of the black population in the US is one of these stupid stereotyped people.
but again, it seems like it is a lot more than that.
no need to be pissed.
#429 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
"no need to be pissed" well don't say there is something wrong with me for something i didn't even say. And no. You're still a simpleton. The number 40 WAS NOT and example trying to express how little people did this. 40 is one millionth of the black population in America. I was only trying to say that it wasn't half a person. So please stop using that as a pathetic argument. The number of black people doing this was the vast minority of the population. Not once did i say it was only 40 people. Once again, please learn how to read, it will help you in life.
User avatar #432 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
half a person was a simple over exaggeration of how 1 millionth was going to be an extremely small fraction of the black population. there obviously isn't just 500,000 black people in the US.
and i said if you think it is 40 then there is something wrong with you, and right now you just said you know it isn't just 40. So, then that statement(insult) doesn't even apply to you.
now, it seems like it is a lot of black people who pull the race card(not this rioting thing, i hope you weren't thinking i was saying a lot of black people riot), don't know if you got the other message where i said a lot doesn't necessarily mean a significant amount.
#436 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
You shouldn't have assumed that I thought that it was only 40 people. That was an idiotic assumption because i did not say that in any way. Saying that a lot of black people are rioting or pull the race card just doesn't sound right. That's still generalizing by putting people into groups. Black people aren't the ones who do this (although there are black people who do) there are plenty of people of other races who do this as well. So the group we should be talking about is a group called "over sensitive idiots" which includes over sensitive idiots from every race. Thank you for understanding. I don't know why people have to argue with me for trying to be fair to everyone.
User avatar #437 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
the way i was putting it may have sounded like an assumption but it no way did i really mean that you actually think it was 40. i was very unclear with this and i apologize.
i was also never trying to say that black people were the only ones that riot(just that it feels like a lot of black people pull the race card, which is a completely separate thing from rioting). like you said it's just a bunch of over sensitive idiots from all backgrounds.
again, sorry if i may have come off as ignorant.
#265 - articulate (07/17/2013) [-]
Things are rarely what they seem.
#251 - Stop throwing people into groups. It's not like all black peop…  [+] (31 new replies) 07/17/2013 on Im Pissed Off +12
User avatar #263 - paradox (07/17/2013) [-]
I agree. im black & i dont pull the race card.
User avatar #253 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
a lot of black people*
#254 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
.... I'm not sure what you're trying to correct there sir. I honestly can't tell what you're trying to say.
User avatar #255 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
i'm not correcting you, i'm correcting the posts statement.
it is not ALL black people, but A LOT of them.
#257 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
A lot in what context though? You say a lot, I say less than like 1 millionth of the black population.
User avatar #268 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
basicly whos doing the rioting? were not lumping them all into one catagory but when i say black people are making this into a big deal how else can i put it? i know its not all o them but a number of people who happen to be black are doing it
#274 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's very simple. You say "stupid people" are rioting. Not "Black people". Because they aren't rioting because their black, otherwise every black person would, it's because they're stupid.
User avatar #281 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
im sorry but thats dumb. its like saying when an apb goes out for a black male its racist even though there is video proof of it being a black male. no one said theyre rioting because theyre black im saying people are rioting these people also are black
#288 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's all about context. When you say "black people are rioting" no one knows if you're talking about all of them or some of them. Do I have to give you an English lesson right here? When a black male is being searched for its perfectly fine to say that. It's a distinguishing physical characteristic that helps people catch who they're looking for. It's so they don't search for someone when they don't know what they look like. how dumb would it be if the police were looking for a robber who they knew was black and they ended up searching a bunch of white guys? When you use it in a case like this though, it creates confusion because you're either being racist, or vague. You could at least say "Stupid black people" if you really want to mention that they're black so bad.
User avatar #291 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
if you are so narrow minded to think that when i say black people i mean all of them you are simply retarded
#294 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
"narrow minded"? So you're saying that if i can't discern what a total stranger means with a completely vague term that I'm retarded? You could be a fucking skinhead nazi for all I know. (not saying you are, please don't go back to that as some sort of pathetic argument against me) Sorry just because you don't want to be wrong doesn't make me retarded.
User avatar #301 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
regardless of my veiws yo should assume that. when is the last time you saw someone say black people and they meant every last one of them. i dont know a single person without one black friend and i live in alaska. even the most redneck racist person i know.
#304 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
Ok. Was I supposed to use my Prof. Xavier powers to read your mind from across the country to know about your background? And usually when people just say "black people" without any other indicator of separating that term from the entire race, they do mean all of them. So maybe you should just stop. I don't think I'm the retarded one here.
User avatar #307 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
no i never expected you to know everything about me i was making a general point. basicly what your saying is if i said black people are outside my house right now you would assume all of them becaus i didnt specify how many or what type. like you said you can use black as an identifier for a male im using it on a larger scale and saying black people as in a group of black people or the black people rioting as this post was talking about
#332 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
No, you're still not understanding. like i said, its all about context. In that context, of course i wouldn't assume all the black people in america were outside your house because theres just not enough room. thats a really dumb example and it kind of shows how stubborn you're being. When you just say black people are rioting about a nationally famous case, then, it seems like you mean the majority of them. Just stop arguing with me about this. You're wrong, accept it and learn.
User avatar #342 - sketchE (07/17/2013) [-]
except im not and your just as stubborn you proved that you canuse your own brain to make assumptions using logic thats how it should be you take the information given to you then based on your own knowledge make an assumption on whats actually going on. you know all black people are not rioting yet you had to make point that because op said black people are rioting hes an uneducated idiot who truly believes all black people in america are rioting right now. if he had said all black people that would make sense but he didnt he said black people
#435 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
It's still both morally, and grammatically wrong to just say "black people are rioting". Go hand in a paper to an english teacher with a generalized statement like that, and they would say be more specific. And for you're information, I do know whats actually going on. I'm not saying this post made me think that all black people were rioting. Theres just enough practically anti-black posts on the front page recently that I assumed he was jumping on the bandwagon with everyone else. That, is using context clues. You're childish example of "oh derp there's black people outside my house" is completely different. And you keep saying i think he was talking about every last fucking black person. I didn't say that. you're being a stubborn child. I meant that he was talking about black people as a whole. I honestly hate arguing with little brats like you. You come up with the weakest, least fluent arguments ever and you think that they're golden, and that you could never possibly be wrong. Please. Stop.
User avatar #440 - sketchE (07/18/2013) [-]
if your not saying he meant that then why even bring it up?
#444 - nickmandemon (07/18/2013) [-]
If you read it again, you would see that i said he was referring to black people as a whole.
User avatar #260 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
that's like half a person.
idk what % but it seems like it is a nice portion of black people.
#267 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
Ok I honestly didn't actually just go and do research on this because i don't feel the need to do research just to prove some guy on funnyjunk wrong. But if you really want to know one millionth of the black population in america is about 40. So it's really not that far off. And if you think that that is a significant portion, then you can't math, sorry.
User avatar #331 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
if you think it is only 40 then there is something wrong with you. like i said, its not all, its not most, but it seems like a lot.
#340 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
I knew that one millionth was not a completely accurate fraction from the second i said it. It was off the top of my head. I was just proving to you that it wasn't half a person.
#336 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
Yeah i could have guessed you would respond with a dumbass argument like that. Obviously i know its not 40. I didn't even say it was 40. Learn how to read please. I said not to far off in the fraction. It would be closer to about 100,000th of the black people in america, which is still the vast minority, you fucking simpleton.
User avatar #419 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
on a side note
a lot doesn't necessarily mean a significant amount.
10% of 100,000,000 is ten million. that is a lot but not a significant amount. hoping this may have cleared things up. sorry if i came off as ignorant.
User avatar #356 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
i have no idea where you are getting these numbers from
obviously 40 was an example trying to express how little of the black population in the US is one of these stupid stereotyped people.
but again, it seems like it is a lot more than that.
no need to be pissed.
#429 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
"no need to be pissed" well don't say there is something wrong with me for something i didn't even say. And no. You're still a simpleton. The number 40 WAS NOT and example trying to express how little people did this. 40 is one millionth of the black population in America. I was only trying to say that it wasn't half a person. So please stop using that as a pathetic argument. The number of black people doing this was the vast minority of the population. Not once did i say it was only 40 people. Once again, please learn how to read, it will help you in life.
User avatar #432 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
half a person was a simple over exaggeration of how 1 millionth was going to be an extremely small fraction of the black population. there obviously isn't just 500,000 black people in the US.
and i said if you think it is 40 then there is something wrong with you, and right now you just said you know it isn't just 40. So, then that statement(insult) doesn't even apply to you.
now, it seems like it is a lot of black people who pull the race card(not this rioting thing, i hope you weren't thinking i was saying a lot of black people riot), don't know if you got the other message where i said a lot doesn't necessarily mean a significant amount.
#436 - nickmandemon (07/17/2013) [-]
You shouldn't have assumed that I thought that it was only 40 people. That was an idiotic assumption because i did not say that in any way. Saying that a lot of black people are rioting or pull the race card just doesn't sound right. That's still generalizing by putting people into groups. Black people aren't the ones who do this (although there are black people who do) there are plenty of people of other races who do this as well. So the group we should be talking about is a group called "over sensitive idiots" which includes over sensitive idiots from every race. Thank you for understanding. I don't know why people have to argue with me for trying to be fair to everyone.
User avatar #437 - contradiction (07/17/2013) [-]
the way i was putting it may have sounded like an assumption but it no way did i really mean that you actually think it was 40. i was very unclear with this and i apologize.
i was also never trying to say that black people were the only ones that riot(just that it feels like a lot of black people pull the race card, which is a completely separate thing from rioting). like you said it's just a bunch of over sensitive idiots from all backgrounds.
again, sorry if i may have come off as ignorant.
#265 - articulate (07/17/2013) [-]
Things are rarely what they seem.
#68 - Lol I've gotten a ride to the skate park from a police officer… 07/17/2013 on Homeless Guy Hero 0
#296 - Comment deleted  [+] (5 new replies) 07/17/2013 on Probably she frightened them. 0
#297 - gladiuss Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#299 - nickmandemon Comment deleted by nickmandemon
User avatar #300 - gladiuss (07/17/2013) [-]
I'm saying, you are a troll. You keep spewing your bogus, strawman arguments as if anything I say had anything to do with what you are putting here. Goodbye and good riddance.
#316 - anonymous Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#301 - anonymous Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#223 - This whole thing wouldn't be a joke to a black guy. How about …  [+] (2 new replies) 07/16/2013 on Probably she frightened them. 0
#313 - anonymous (07/18/2013) [-]
Stop being a butthurt little bitch, you nigger ass jew.
#224 - gewehr (07/16/2013) [-]
Considering this is a website dedicated to jokes and humor, you're taking this rather seriously.
#220 - Actually I'm not black. I just believe everyone is born equal.…  [+] (4 new replies) 07/16/2013 on Probably she frightened them. +1
#222 - gewehr (07/16/2013) [-]
relax dude it was a joke
#223 - nickmandemon (07/16/2013) [-]
This whole thing wouldn't be a joke to a black guy. How about you think from someone else's perspective rather than just your own.
#313 - anonymous (07/18/2013) [-]
Stop being a butthurt little bitch, you nigger ass jew.
#224 - gewehr (07/16/2013) [-]
Considering this is a website dedicated to jokes and humor, you're taking this rather seriously.
#217 - Comment deleted  [+] (7 new replies) 07/16/2013 on Probably she frightened them. 0
#227 - gladiuss Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#296 - nickmandemon Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#297 - gladiuss Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#299 - nickmandemon Comment deleted by nickmandemon
User avatar #300 - gladiuss (07/17/2013) [-]
I'm saying, you are a troll. You keep spewing your bogus, strawman arguments as if anything I say had anything to do with what you are putting here. Goodbye and good riddance.
#316 - anonymous Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#301 - anonymous Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#210 - Yeah because every black person lives in the ghetto. You are t…  [+] (9 new replies) 07/16/2013 on Probably she frightened them. +3
#221 - klldarkness has deleted their comment.
#236 - gladiuss (07/16/2013) [-]
Your argument was bogus, uneducated and FULL RETARD.
#235 - Greevon (07/16/2013) [-]
You might be correct.
If it weren't for the fact that Egypt IS part of Africa. You can't just say "All of Africa EXCEPT the part that doesn't agree with my argument."
And even besides that, your argument is certainly NOT an argument of geography and history. You are making an argument of inherent nature of groups of individuals, implying all Africans, or really all black people for that matter since you imply that they take this inherent nature wherever they go, are savage and brutal individuals who have no place in society except as the lowest rungs or as criminals.
Regardless of what you tell yourself, you are a racist and you are making a racist's argument.
#213 - gewehr (07/16/2013) [-]
Found the black guy
#220 - nickmandemon (07/16/2013) [-]
Actually I'm not black. I just believe everyone is born equal. But i guess thats a foreign concept to a racist.
#222 - gewehr (07/16/2013) [-]
relax dude it was a joke
#223 - nickmandemon (07/16/2013) [-]
This whole thing wouldn't be a joke to a black guy. How about you think from someone else's perspective rather than just your own.
#313 - anonymous (07/18/2013) [-]
Stop being a butthurt little bitch, you nigger ass jew.
#224 - gewehr (07/16/2013) [-]
Considering this is a website dedicated to jokes and humor, you're taking this rather seriously.
#208 - I agree with you. Don't listen to the ignorant little cunts th… 07/16/2013 on Probably she frightened them. -3
#207 - Comment deleted  [+] (9 new replies) 07/16/2013 on Probably she frightened them. +3
#212 - gladiuss Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#217 - nickmandemon Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#227 - gladiuss Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#296 - nickmandemon Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#297 - gladiuss Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#299 - nickmandemon Comment deleted by nickmandemon
User avatar #300 - gladiuss (07/17/2013) [-]
I'm saying, you are a troll. You keep spewing your bogus, strawman arguments as if anything I say had anything to do with what you are putting here. Goodbye and good riddance.
#316 - anonymous Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#301 - anonymous Comment deleted by nickmandemon
#94 - It's ok, just don't mention it on this site. It's full of litt… 07/15/2013 on Canada's Greatest Enemy +1
#21 - Hey hey hey.... Bruno Mars has an amazing voice. 07/15/2013 on ,,, -6
#78 - Yep. America has the attention span of a squirrel. We focus on… 07/15/2013 on Zimmerman Not Guilty +1
#74 - I get what you mean, but i think there were a few more factors…  [+] (2 new replies) 07/15/2013 on Zimmerman Not Guilty 0
User avatar #77 - kjftiger (07/15/2013) [-]
The media also exaggerated a lot of the stuff (like usual). No one for sure knows exactly what happened that night (I doubt Zimmerman and Martin even knew 100% of whatwas going on) so we will never know all the facts or who was really telling the truth. All we can do now is except that it is all over and within a week (maybe a month) no one will even remember this event.
#78 - nickmandemon (07/15/2013) [-]
Yep. America has the attention span of a squirrel. We focus on one problem for months, and then we move on to another one without solving it. Damn it. I try not to think of these things.
#69 - Well then those people are stupid and intelligent people shoul…  [+] (4 new replies) 07/15/2013 on Zimmerman Not Guilty 0
User avatar #72 - kjftiger (07/15/2013) [-]
It was a horrible situation, but things happen like that all the time and no one, other than those involved, usually hears about it. So I just don't get why this situation needed to be broadcasted nationally.
#74 - nickmandemon (07/15/2013) [-]
I get what you mean, but i think there were a few more factors involved. Like I said, hes an adult and he shot a teenager for one thing, and he was part of a neighborhood watch, who are supposed to protect people. And, one thing that brought alot of attention to it was the fact that he was told NOT to follow the kid. But yeah the media did a pretty thorough job of making it seem like this one murder is different than the hundreds of others that happen every day, there was just alot of legal mumbo jumbo tied to it.
User avatar #77 - kjftiger (07/15/2013) [-]
The media also exaggerated a lot of the stuff (like usual). No one for sure knows exactly what happened that night (I doubt Zimmerman and Martin even knew 100% of whatwas going on) so we will never know all the facts or who was really telling the truth. All we can do now is except that it is all over and within a week (maybe a month) no one will even remember this event.
#78 - nickmandemon (07/15/2013) [-]
Yep. America has the attention span of a squirrel. We focus on one problem for months, and then we move on to another one without solving it. Damn it. I try not to think of these things.
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 1050 / Total items point value: 1500

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #1 - MrDeadiron (04/30/2014) [-]
I added you because I really enjoyed how you told that guy off. Didnt want you to think I was some weirdo.
#2 to #1 - nickmandemon (04/30/2014) [-]
Lol thanks dude i enjoyed the friend request
 Friends (0)