|Funny Pictures||Funny Videos|
|Funny GIFs||YouTube Videos|
Rank #7269 on CommentsLevel 221 Comments: Mind Blower
OfflineSend mail to shinku Block shinku Invite shinku to be your friend flag avatar
or not to wind?
or not to wind?
latest user's comments
|#227 - joke - - - - - - - - - … [+] (1 new reply)||8 hours ago on Problem Post||0|
|#224 - I can't figure out how to log out of FunnyJunk [+] (3 new replies)||8 hours ago on Problem Post||0|
|#59 - Because axes don't run out of bullets and you don't have to re… [+] (1 new reply)||09/14/2014 on fuck you zombies||0|
#78 - chromeberd (09/14/2014) [-]
You're forgetting that pretty much any gun can have a silencer attached to it and is more than enough to kill an undead if it's a show in the head, and even if a silencer does produce sound, I wouldn't say it's any worse than taking your chances head on. Where the amount of noise the zombie or you would produce in the struggle would more likely make more than enough noise to draw attention.
If you don't HAVE A silencer than I would say it would be better to take the risk, realistically a gunshot isn't going to produce vagrant undead figures to immediately head towards your position. and even if it did the fact that you had to shoot in the first place would mean that it was done on the offense, as any defendable region wouldn't even allow the presence of a zombie to be there in the first place. IE upper floor, roof, anywhere that takes a ladder to get to.
When you're dealing with the undead, protected or not, your greatest benefit is distance from them. Presuming they're the type to roam slowly. Either way even if you're dressed for a riot they simply do not register pain and can easily rip, tug, remove any article of protection that might become useful to you in an attempt to attack you.
One more thing, If you're seriously presuming that you can use melee to deal with the undead, you really should think about just ho much energy that consumes. If you were to realistically go against an undead figure as a method of choice then by the time you finish it you might be too tired to run if things become less favourable.
The ONLY reason melee might be considered useful in a realistic combat situation is as a last resort situation or if you were absolutely positive you were dealing with a 1 on 1 encounter with one that had poor motor controls. Ammunition or not, if you have it you spend it, if you don't you're better off running.
|#40 - As long as its not Green Lantern im ok with any of them.||09/14/2014 on Choose one!||0|
|#16 - Its funny because if you are black you like Obama for literall… [+] (27 new replies)||09/14/2014 on (untitled)||+27|
#28 - anonymous (09/14/2014) [-]
all people( minorities more than other, because of the perceived unjustice/racism towards them) tend to prefer/support the person they identify, as in the same ethnicity/'race'. This has been taught to them by their parents, " we have to stick together" etc etc , rather than to question every status quo. Thinking for yourself is something not as easily obtained when you are in a close community, while other let's say white people have been emancipated through more economic freedom what leads to a more individual society.
You can't blame them really , it'll die out when poverty does.
#37 - apurpleliger (09/14/2014) [-]
The first two sentences were fine. But this has nothing to do with poverty. Everyone in the world more easily identifies with people like them. That's why there are so many communities full of almost exclusively one race/nationality, even if they've all willingly and individually immigrated to the country. Doesn't matter what that race or nationality is.
There are neighborhoods in Australia that are predominantly American families. There are neighborhoods in America that are predominantly Filipino families. Neither are being oppressed, neither are poor on the whole. They just like to be around what they know. They can think for themselves, they just have similar opinions on average.
#73 - marinepenguin (09/14/2014) [-]
So it's just coincidence that 93-96% of blacks voted for Obama, and 70% of Latinos voted for him as well? While only 52% of those who voted for Romney were white?
Obama appealed to minorities, so more minorities voted for him because of that, it's very simple to understand.
#75 - nigeltheoutlaw (09/14/2014) [-]
Yes; blacks have always voted in droves for the more liberal party. This makes as much sense as saying "the majority of blacks voted for Clinton so clearly they only voted for him because he's white!"
Appealing through policies isn't the same as being voted for just because of your race. That's a completely different topic.
#76 - marinepenguin (09/14/2014) [-]
They have in general voted democrat, I'm aware of that, but not at that level. I'm not saying all blacks voted for him ONLY because he is also a minority, but if you have lived anywhere near a largely black populated area (I live near St. Louis), you'd understand.
I've been told I'm racist because I don't like Obama. These are by the same kind of people who were destroying Ferguson earlier last month.
#77 - nigeltheoutlaw (09/14/2014) [-]
You may not have said that, but the comment I responded to said exactly that: "if you are black you like Obama for literally no other reason other than hes black." You responded to me as if you were defending that statement. If you weren't then there was really no point to this discussion.
#41 - anonymous (09/14/2014) [-]
I knew 2 black people who didn't vote for obama. Even then, such a small amount of minorities vote republican anyway. And just like people voted for him because he's black I'm sure people didn't because he's black.
#43 - marinepenguin (09/14/2014) [-]
Well I'm not saying that all black people voted for Obama, and I'm not saying that all black people who did, voted purely because of color, but there were many many of them who voted purely because they hoped that he would help change the blacks circumstances. This really comes down to voting on an impulse, like voting Republican or Democrat because you are one, and shows a lack of real education in your political position. The same can go for people who refused to vote for him purely because of color. But that is a whole other discussion.
#39 - sspacecore (09/14/2014) [-]
No, I never said being wrong equated to being retarded, but considering the fact you don't possess the amount of intelligence to understand what I meant in my previous comment, allow me to clarify; "I think you're retarded" relates to the fact not that you were wrong, but to the fact that you came to such a perverted conclusion given that he had already received a positive amount of thumbs, and that his comment was completely logical, and has been proven multiple times in practice (see comment #28) by the time you posted your idiotic comment.
#40 - grrphc (09/14/2014) [-]
>If some people do that then they all do that
No you fucking dumbass, it hasn't been proven.
I thought it got positive thumbs because people were laughing along, as a joke. Not because people were legitimately so racist that they believe ALL fucking black people voted for Obama solely for the purpose he's black.
Saying "I think it's sarcasm" isn't idiotic in the slightest, it's a thought.
Black people aren't all niggers, and niggers aren't the only black people in America. Learn the difference.
#45 - sspacecore (09/14/2014) [-]
You state things that everyone with a high school level of education already knows, obviously not all black people are niggers, but if you have a basic understanding of political economics, there was no reason to vote for Obama unless you were A. an unintelligent "black" person who identified with Obama, solely because he is also "black" (see comment #28), B. an unintelligent democrat who identified with Obama, solely because he is a democrat (again, see comment #28). Please, think about rereading your comments before you post them, and maybe then you would see that "greentexting" and using profanity is the easiest way to make your entire argument look foolish. Finally, are you implying that a thought in itself cannot be idiotic, that all thoughts are intelligent?
#46 - grrphc (09/14/2014) [-]
Implying there was any reason to vote for Romney over Obama of all people?
McCain maybe, but definitely not Obama.
Also, Obama is incredibly charismatic, especially while he was a senator and during his first election. It was a no brainer that he was going to win with all that he was saying and promising, You projecting your assumptions onto people as if they were fact doesn't make it true.
This argument started because you called me retarded solely for THINKING that he was being sarcastic, that's it. You're making this something much bigger than it actually was.
Also, I don't think thoughts are either. I think they're thoughts. Ideas. Things that pop into someone's head that lead to actions that can be smart or dumb.
#47 - sspacecore (09/14/2014) [-]
Listen, I don't have time to keep arguing, let me make it clear that completely respect your opinion, while I think you are wrong, I respect the points you made in your comments, I just disagree with them. I feel like I did a good job of proving you wrong, while you do not, there appears to be nothing I can do change that, and even then I don't have time to do so if there was a way. Goodbye.
|#56 - >mfw ive fapped to that||09/12/2014 on Cow||+1|
|#90 - 2 best waifus in one pic.... saved||09/10/2014 on Hover powers activate||+2|
|#99 - >Without E >E in title||09/10/2014 on Focus||+7|
|#60 - >finally said it you mean like literally all day every day||09/08/2014 on (Sounds of incoherent rage)||0|
|#35 - You really think someone would do that? Go on the internet and…||09/08/2014 on Vanilla house||0|