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

hide menu

tedge    

Rank #23281 on Comments
no avatar Level 149 Comments: Faptastic
Offline
Send mail to tedge Block tedge Invite tedge to be your friend
Last status update:
-
Personal Info
Gender: male
Age: 24
Date Signed Up:10/09/2010
Last Login:10/20/2014
Funnyjunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#23281
Highest Content Rank:#5708
Highest Comment Rank:#6393
Content Thumbs: 223 total,  320 ,  97
Comment Thumbs: 518 total,  865 ,  347
Content Level Progress: 30% (3/10)
Level 22 Content: Peasant → Level 23 Content: Peasant
Comment Level Progress: 70% (7/10)
Level 149 Comments: Faptastic → Level 150 Comments: Faptastic
Subscribers:0
Content Views:5592
Times Content Favorited:23 times
Total Comments Made:435
FJ Points:671
Favorite Tags: Pokemon (3)

latest user's comments

#199 - i dont know about all that, i know they're trained not to use …  [+] (4 new replies) 08/29/2014 on It only works one way +1
User avatar #200 - ilikewaterham (08/29/2014) [-]
If someone is reaching for a cops weapon, they have every right to defend themselves and use lethal force. Unfortunately right now this case is nothing more than a bunch of "he said she said", and we don't know the facts. If he did assault the officer and reach for the gun, then the cop did what he should have done and neutralized the threat. If not, then this is nothing more than a cold blooded murder. I doubt that it was that though. And of course he would be suspended, a white cop killing a black kid from a very black neighborhood isn't good for public image.
#201 - tedge (08/29/2014) [-]
i dont think that what he did warrants six bullets, im telling you, one shot that even grazed the kid would have done the trick. and the point is, if you dont have to kill, you dont kill. plain and simple, maybe it doesnt say that in the police handbook, but it's one of the main principles of being a decent human being. if it were up to me the cop would not still be alive. if the kid didnt die, he should be in jail, what he did was wrong, still doesnt warrant such an excess of force.
User avatar #203 - ilikewaterham (08/29/2014) [-]
I said it once I'll say it again, if a cop is going to use his weapon he's going to mag dump. They're told to shoot until the threat is neutralized (DEAD). Reaching for a weapon to use against an officer is enough of a reason to put someone down. But hey, if he did just kill the kid for lolz then I'm right there with ya, let him fry. But one last time, when a cop shoots, it's to kill.
#256 - tedge (08/30/2014) [-]
fair enough, i guess my point is that having the right to do something, and it being the right thing to do dont coincide in this case.
#196 - well any normal citizen would be tried for murder if they cont… 08/29/2014 on It only works one way 0
#185 - the problem with what happened is the ******* cop…  [+] (8 new replies) 08/29/2014 on It only works one way +2
User avatar #198 - ilikewaterham (08/29/2014) [-]
You do realize that officers are trained to only fire their weapons with the intent to render the threat neutralized, and are trained to fire as many rounds as it takes to have the assailant down and incapable of movement, right?
#199 - tedge (08/29/2014) [-]
i dont know about all that, i know they're trained not to use deadly force where its not necessary and in this situation it was not necessary. if what he did was in any way "by the books" they wouldn't have suspended him.
User avatar #200 - ilikewaterham (08/29/2014) [-]
If someone is reaching for a cops weapon, they have every right to defend themselves and use lethal force. Unfortunately right now this case is nothing more than a bunch of "he said she said", and we don't know the facts. If he did assault the officer and reach for the gun, then the cop did what he should have done and neutralized the threat. If not, then this is nothing more than a cold blooded murder. I doubt that it was that though. And of course he would be suspended, a white cop killing a black kid from a very black neighborhood isn't good for public image.
#201 - tedge (08/29/2014) [-]
i dont think that what he did warrants six bullets, im telling you, one shot that even grazed the kid would have done the trick. and the point is, if you dont have to kill, you dont kill. plain and simple, maybe it doesnt say that in the police handbook, but it's one of the main principles of being a decent human being. if it were up to me the cop would not still be alive. if the kid didnt die, he should be in jail, what he did was wrong, still doesnt warrant such an excess of force.
User avatar #203 - ilikewaterham (08/29/2014) [-]
I said it once I'll say it again, if a cop is going to use his weapon he's going to mag dump. They're told to shoot until the threat is neutralized (DEAD). Reaching for a weapon to use against an officer is enough of a reason to put someone down. But hey, if he did just kill the kid for lolz then I'm right there with ya, let him fry. But one last time, when a cop shoots, it's to kill.
#256 - tedge (08/30/2014) [-]
fair enough, i guess my point is that having the right to do something, and it being the right thing to do dont coincide in this case.
User avatar #188 - amishparadise (08/29/2014) [-]
If I'm shooting someone, I'm not just shooting once and checking, if I have to shoot I'm making damn sure that fucker doesn't get a chance to come at me again
#196 - tedge (08/29/2014) [-]
well any normal citizen would be tried for murder if they continued to fire after the threat was gone, i dont know about you but even one bullet is gonna deter me from reaching again. plus if he hand the gun in his hand the kid shouldnt have been able to get it from him anyways. im not saying the kid was a saint, but one bullet in the leg would have done the trick. or even just backhanding him would have worked. cops are given night sticks for a reason, the kid never seriously posed a threat on his life. the pig should be burned at the stake.
#1 - i guess we know he didnt die of dehydration. 08/12/2014 on How Golf was invented. 0
#188 - heres how i feel. its a noble thing to do, its also very brave… 07/22/2014 on Yeah (see desc) 0
#9 - nice 06/30/2014 on Water pulse 0
#21 - if timed right any part of the song can match up with any part… 06/30/2014 on fight club 0
#44 - you are my new favorite person. 06/29/2014 on SJWs in a nuttshell 0
#51 - i agree that it is never the person who got raped's fault, but… 05/15/2014 on Rape Culture 0
#1 - okay, I'll bite. what the hell is handjammin?  [+] (1 new reply) 04/08/2014 on YFW you catch your main... +3
#2 - yaboydoubled (04/08/2014) [-]
Jacking off
#2 - i'd **** the **** out of ugly betty 12/16/2013 on I BABYSIT MEN +1
#4 - thumbed down because you tried to be serious on the internet a… 12/16/2013 on popular opinion puffin -1
#30 - awwww, thats cute China 12/16/2013 on This Week in Science ! +3
#25 - ATF or, Alaskan Thunder **** . my favorite strain … 12/16/2013 on Simpsons knew it +1
#261 - because guys (on the average) don't change to please society, … 12/12/2013 on ooooo 0
#3 - some atheists are intelligent. some are ******* r… 12/11/2013 on Thats coming from a... +5
#104 - no, but it did better. plus it's strong evidence that it's bet… 12/11/2013 on   0
#8 - Comment deleted 12/11/2013 on ITT: Discussion Time Bitches 0
#4 - 22% have no affiliation with "The spot" and 14% don'…  [+] (2 new replies) 12/11/2013 on igloos +10
#9 - xxxsonic fanxxx (12/11/2013) [-]
92% of the 22% that have no affiliation with "The spot" now want to know what the spot is and 5% of the 14% that don't believe the spot exists have found faith and accepted "The spot" as their god.
#12 - xxxsonic fanxxx (12/11/2013) [-]
80% of people polled were found not to give a fuck.
#4 - that's what i was thinking. 12/11/2013 on She knows what's going on 0
#6 - Comment deleted 12/10/2013 on Black Metal -3
#10 - nope, he's right. a liter is volume. so when a liter of water … 12/10/2013 on Explain this to me? 0
#4 - had to sing the whole song to myself. 12/10/2013 on Took Me A Minute 0
#14 - i guess it's because i believe that your body is your own juri…  [+] (1 new reply) 12/10/2013 on In all honesty.. 0
User avatar #15 - masdercheef (12/10/2013) [-]
That's a pretty alright way to look at things. I mean, clearly people are going to keep using meth no matter what- it's an "illegal" drug already and that hasn't stopped everyone.

Something that could work in favor of both points of view would be to make it legal to use, like you suggest, but also educate people of how badly things can go wrong if they do it too much. Moderation, right? Not necessarily try to stop them from using it in excess, but let them know that if they do, they'll have to deal with the consequences? I mean, it's alright to let people do what they will to themselves, but it also seems a bit irresponsible to say something's legal and then not let people know of the side effects that might come with it.
#11 - so you're saying we should sell meth at gas stations? anyone c…  [+] (3 new replies) 12/10/2013 on In all honesty.. 0
User avatar #12 - masdercheef (12/10/2013) [-]
No no no, not at all. I was saying, why make it illegal to sell if you're not going to bother to make it illegal to use ("it should never be illegal to do/ be on a drug.") ? I don't see how that accomplishes a whole lot in the way of keeping it out of the hands of the public. I personally believe it would be a better option to make it illegal to use as well.

I'm saying, if it's something that's so risky, why shouldn't it be illegal to use too? Like those energy drinks that people die from drinking. It should sure as hell be illegal to sell, but if it's okay to use it then people are just going to keep finding ways to get it, like they are now, except that there will be no way to stop them from actually using the stuff once they get it.
#14 - tedge (12/10/2013) [-]
i guess it's because i believe that your body is your own jurisdiction. you can put whatever the hell you want in it. Keeping it illegal to sell will keep it expensive and people won't be able to buy as much, and fewer people will have access to it. but if you're high on meth, and you're not hurting anyone, you're not doing anything wrong.
User avatar #15 - masdercheef (12/10/2013) [-]
That's a pretty alright way to look at things. I mean, clearly people are going to keep using meth no matter what- it's an "illegal" drug already and that hasn't stopped everyone.

Something that could work in favor of both points of view would be to make it legal to use, like you suggest, but also educate people of how badly things can go wrong if they do it too much. Moderation, right? Not necessarily try to stop them from using it in excess, but let them know that if they do, they'll have to deal with the consequences? I mean, it's alright to let people do what they will to themselves, but it also seems a bit irresponsible to say something's legal and then not let people know of the side effects that might come with it.
Show:
Sort by:
Order:

items

Total unique items point value: 2070 / Total items point value: 2070

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Per page:
Order:
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #2 - shitdickinator (11/12/2013) [-]
can I have any of your points?
User avatar #1 - runici (09/15/2011) [-]
please, show me your face when you learned how to fap
#3 to #1 - tedge (12/05/2013) [-]
eww gross dude. what's your problem?
 Friends (0)