What are your unpopular opinions?
Discussion
wildoliver said:
I think a new law should be passed making anyone commiting a crime an outlaw without any legal protection for up to an hour after it was committed. Meaning anyone can commit a crime against you without fear of repercussions.
Along the lines of the purge but instead of decent people being in fear of their safety it's those who make it their mission in life to make others lives miserable. It would be interesting to see the effect on low level crime (the type that bothers most people as it's so prolific) if all of a sudden the the perpetrators weren't untouchable.
that's an early 3 pint lunchAlong the lines of the purge but instead of decent people being in fear of their safety it's those who make it their mission in life to make others lives miserable. It would be interesting to see the effect on low level crime (the type that bothers most people as it's so prolific) if all of a sudden the the perpetrators weren't untouchable.
Blown2CV said:
wildoliver said:
I think a new law should be passed making anyone commiting a crime an outlaw without any legal protection for up to an hour after it was committed. Meaning anyone can commit a crime against you without fear of repercussions.
Along the lines of the purge but instead of decent people being in fear of their safety it's those who make it their mission in life to make others lives miserable. It would be interesting to see the effect on low level crime (the type that bothers most people as it's so prolific) if all of a sudden the the perpetrators weren't untouchable.
that's an early 3 pint lunchAlong the lines of the purge but instead of decent people being in fear of their safety it's those who make it their mission in life to make others lives miserable. It would be interesting to see the effect on low level crime (the type that bothers most people as it's so prolific) if all of a sudden the the perpetrators weren't untouchable.
wildoliver said:
amusingduck said:
wildoliver said:
I think a new law should be passed making anyone commiting a crime an outlaw without any legal protection for up to an hour after it was committed. Meaning anyone can commit a crime against you without fear of repercussions.
Along the lines of the purge but instead of decent people being in fear of their safety it's those who make it their mission in life to make others lives miserable. It would be interesting to see the effect on low level crime (the type that bothers most people as it's so prolific) if all of a sudden the the perpetrators weren't untouchable.
Along the lines of the purge but instead of decent people being in fear of their safety it's those who make it their mission in life to make others lives miserable. It would be interesting to see the effect on low level crime (the type that bothers most people as it's so prolific) if all of a sudden the the perpetrators weren't untouchable.
Definitely no flaws with that plan
Timmy40 said:
Men are simply not designed to be monogamous and can be expected to have the occasional foray into another bush. I'm fairly certain this opinion would be unpopular at home so I've kept it to myself so far.
ha ha - unpopular??!?! IN other news the world is round.Monogamy is purely and simply in existence to reduce the amount of trouble on the planet.
It just doesn't' work on a biological level.
Clearly higher intelligence gives us the ability as a species to understand consequences of such a old fashioned set of rules.
The Selfish Gene said:
Timmy40 said:
Men are simply not designed to be monogamous and can be expected to have the occasional foray into another bush. I'm fairly certain this opinion would be unpopular at home so I've kept it to myself so far.
ha ha - unpopular??!?! IN other news the world is round.Monogamy is purely and simply in existence to reduce the amount of trouble on the planet.
It just doesn't' work on a biological level.
Clearly higher intelligence gives us the ability as a species to understand consequences of such a old fashioned set of rules.
Timmy40 said:
Hey I didn't say it was news, just that pointing the fact out seems for some reason to be an unpopular opinion with roughly half the worlds population, many of whom seem to get quite unreasonable about the whole thing.
noted. and yet prostitution is one of the oldest professions in the world. It's odd - I guess the users of that service are the 'roughly other half' you speak of!!
captain_cynic said:
wildoliver said:
amusingduck said:
wildoliver said:
I think a new law should be passed making anyone commiting a crime an outlaw without any legal protection for up to an hour after it was committed. Meaning anyone can commit a crime against you without fear of repercussions.
Along the lines of the purge but instead of decent people being in fear of their safety it's those who make it their mission in life to make others lives miserable. It would be interesting to see the effect on low level crime (the type that bothers most people as it's so prolific) if all of a sudden the the perpetrators weren't untouchable.
Along the lines of the purge but instead of decent people being in fear of their safety it's those who make it their mission in life to make others lives miserable. It would be interesting to see the effect on low level crime (the type that bothers most people as it's so prolific) if all of a sudden the the perpetrators weren't untouchable.
Definitely no flaws with that plan
See someone dropping something on the floor, give them slap. Catch someone breaking in to your car and they get a good hiding.
Of course it will all deteriorate in to chaos when people claim others committed crimes just to get a free murder in.
So I'll change my unpopular suggestion to people shouldn't get handouts from the state. There should be a pay in insurance scheme where the length of time worked and paid in to allows a certain amount of benefits then that's it cut off. Either your family support you or you find work or you starve.
Its been said I make Stalin look moderate.
wildoliver said:
Ah I think your misunderstanding the genius of the situation. It removes all that waffle.
See someone dropping something on the floor, give them slap. Catch someone breaking in to your car and they get a good hiding.
Of course it will all deteriorate in to chaos when people claim others committed crimes just to get a free murder in.
So I'll change my unpopular suggestion to people shouldn't get handouts from the state. There should be a pay in insurance scheme where the length of time worked and paid in to allows a certain amount of benefits then that's it cut off. Either your family support you or you find work or you starve.
Its been said I make Stalin look moderate.
Ahhh, basically it's like a purge. See someone litter, you can assault them. Someone sees you assaulting someone, they can assault you, so on and so forth.See someone dropping something on the floor, give them slap. Catch someone breaking in to your car and they get a good hiding.
Of course it will all deteriorate in to chaos when people claim others committed crimes just to get a free murder in.
So I'll change my unpopular suggestion to people shouldn't get handouts from the state. There should be a pay in insurance scheme where the length of time worked and paid in to allows a certain amount of benefits then that's it cut off. Either your family support you or you find work or you starve.
Its been said I make Stalin look moderate.
The same argument I use with American gun nuts.
Mallory shoots Alice, Bob sees this and gets out his gun to shoot Mallory. Charlie sees Bob with a gun assumes he's the shooter and shoots Bob. Dan seeing this commotion of Charlie just shooting someone thinks that charlie must be the active shooter and shoots charlie. Mallory then shoots Dan. In the end the attacker is the only survivor (yay for arming everyone).
captain_cynic said:
wildoliver said:
Ah I think your misunderstanding the genius of the situation. It removes all that waffle.
See someone dropping something on the floor, give them slap. Catch someone breaking in to your car and they get a good hiding.
Of course it will all deteriorate in to chaos when people claim others committed crimes just to get a free murder in.
So I'll change my unpopular suggestion to people shouldn't get handouts from the state. There should be a pay in insurance scheme where the length of time worked and paid in to allows a certain amount of benefits then that's it cut off. Either your family support you or you find work or you starve.
Its been said I make Stalin look moderate.
Ahhh, basically it's like a purge. See someone litter, you can assault them. Someone sees you assaulting someone, they can assault you, so on and so forth.See someone dropping something on the floor, give them slap. Catch someone breaking in to your car and they get a good hiding.
Of course it will all deteriorate in to chaos when people claim others committed crimes just to get a free murder in.
So I'll change my unpopular suggestion to people shouldn't get handouts from the state. There should be a pay in insurance scheme where the length of time worked and paid in to allows a certain amount of benefits then that's it cut off. Either your family support you or you find work or you starve.
Its been said I make Stalin look moderate.
The same argument I use with American gun nuts.
Mallory shoots Alice, Bob sees this and gets out his gun to shoot Mallory. Charlie sees Bob with a gun assumes he's the shooter and shoots Bob. Dan seeing this commotion of Charlie just shooting someone thinks that charlie must be the active shooter and shoots charlie. Mallory then shoots Dan. In the end the attacker is the only survivor (yay for arming everyone).
Person a commits crime.
Person b does something to them.
Person a lost their protection in law when they committed crimes so person b doesn't commit a crime.
If person c whose friends perhaps with person a assaults person b then they commit a crime allowing person a,b,d etc. To do anything to them without repercussion.
It's all perfectly straight forward.
wildoliver said:
captain_cynic said:
wildoliver said:
Ah I think your misunderstanding the genius of the situation. It removes all that waffle.
See someone dropping something on the floor, give them slap. Catch someone breaking in to your car and they get a good hiding.
Of course it will all deteriorate in to chaos when people claim others committed crimes just to get a free murder in.
So I'll change my unpopular suggestion to people shouldn't get handouts from the state. There should be a pay in insurance scheme where the length of time worked and paid in to allows a certain amount of benefits then that's it cut off. Either your family support you or you find work or you starve.
Its been said I make Stalin look moderate.
Ahhh, basically it's like a purge. See someone litter, you can assault them. Someone sees you assaulting someone, they can assault you, so on and so forth.See someone dropping something on the floor, give them slap. Catch someone breaking in to your car and they get a good hiding.
Of course it will all deteriorate in to chaos when people claim others committed crimes just to get a free murder in.
So I'll change my unpopular suggestion to people shouldn't get handouts from the state. There should be a pay in insurance scheme where the length of time worked and paid in to allows a certain amount of benefits then that's it cut off. Either your family support you or you find work or you starve.
Its been said I make Stalin look moderate.
The same argument I use with American gun nuts.
Mallory shoots Alice, Bob sees this and gets out his gun to shoot Mallory. Charlie sees Bob with a gun assumes he's the shooter and shoots Bob. Dan seeing this commotion of Charlie just shooting someone thinks that charlie must be the active shooter and shoots charlie. Mallory then shoots Dan. In the end the attacker is the only survivor (yay for arming everyone).
Person a commits crime.
Person b does something to them.
Person a lost their protection in law when they committed crimes so person b doesn't commit a crime.
If person c whose friends perhaps with person a assaults person b then they commit a crime allowing person a,b,d etc. To do anything to them without repercussion.
It's all perfectly straight forward.
Like the gun-nuts you're assuming that everyone has perfect awareness of what goes on.
1. So Alice drops her Costa cup just anywhere
2. Bob sees it and decides to give Alice a good bashing.
3. Charlie sees Bob assaulting Alice, decides to intervene.
4. Dan shows up and sees Bob over a bloody Charlie... the chaos continues.
Charlie or Dan didn't see the preceding crime... I think I've just explained why we have courts and investigations.
captain_cynic said:
wildoliver said:
captain_cynic said:
wildoliver said:
Ah I think your misunderstanding the genius of the situation. It removes all that waffle.
See someone dropping something on the floor, give them slap. Catch someone breaking in to your car and they get a good hiding.
Of course it will all deteriorate in to chaos when people claim others committed crimes just to get a free murder in.
So I'll change my unpopular suggestion to people shouldn't get handouts from the state. There should be a pay in insurance scheme where the length of time worked and paid in to allows a certain amount of benefits then that's it cut off. Either your family support you or you find work or you starve.
Its been said I make Stalin look moderate.
Ahhh, basically it's like a purge. See someone litter, you can assault them. Someone sees you assaulting someone, they can assault you, so on and so forth.See someone dropping something on the floor, give them slap. Catch someone breaking in to your car and they get a good hiding.
Of course it will all deteriorate in to chaos when people claim others committed crimes just to get a free murder in.
So I'll change my unpopular suggestion to people shouldn't get handouts from the state. There should be a pay in insurance scheme where the length of time worked and paid in to allows a certain amount of benefits then that's it cut off. Either your family support you or you find work or you starve.
Its been said I make Stalin look moderate.
The same argument I use with American gun nuts.
Mallory shoots Alice, Bob sees this and gets out his gun to shoot Mallory. Charlie sees Bob with a gun assumes he's the shooter and shoots Bob. Dan seeing this commotion of Charlie just shooting someone thinks that charlie must be the active shooter and shoots charlie. Mallory then shoots Dan. In the end the attacker is the only survivor (yay for arming everyone).
Person a commits crime.
Person b does something to them.
Person a lost their protection in law when they committed crimes so person b doesn't commit a crime.
If person c whose friends perhaps with person a assaults person b then they commit a crime allowing person a,b,d etc. To do anything to them without repercussion.
It's all perfectly straight forward.
Like the gun-nuts you're assuming that everyone has perfect awareness of what goes on.
1. So Alice drops her Costa cup just anywhere
2. Bob sees it and decides to give Alice a good bashing.
3. Charlie sees Bob assaulting Alice, decides to intervene.
4. Dan shows up and sees Bob over a bloody Charlie... the chaos continues.
Charlie or Dan didn't see the preceding crime... I think I've just explained why we have courts and investigations.
Jason kicks Michel in the nuts, full force, Michael falls down
Bob sees Jason kick Michael and intervenes, but notices Michael has his nob out. Jason explains the situation and seeing as how there is still 45 minutes to go, Michael gets a further pasting.
Seems to work.
Jews need to stop playing the holocaust card. It was a long time ago and while very bad, things have changed. However, it might be an idea to have a think about why your religion rubs many people up the wrong way. Not being a religious man I've no idea why people get so pissed off with you, but someone probably does.
Willy Nilly said:
Jews need to stop playing the holocaust card. It was a long time ago and while very bad, things have changed. However, it might be an idea to have a think about why your religion rubs many people up the wrong way. Not being a religious man I've no idea why people get so pissed off with you, but someone probably does.
The holocaust wasn't about religion, it was about race. The Nazis had ideas about Jews contaminating the racial purity of the German people. Hitler couldn't give a toss about religion.The Selfish Gene said:
Timmy40 said:
Men are simply not designed to be monogamous and can be expected to have the occasional foray into another bush. I'm fairly certain this opinion would be unpopular at home so I've kept it to myself so far.
Monogamy ... just doesn't' work on a biological level.I suppose it is a matter of whether you think of yourself as a swan or a gorilla.
Willy Nilly said:
Jews need to stop playing the holocaust card. It was a long time ago and while very bad, things have changed. However, it might be an idea to have a think about why your religion rubs many people up the wrong way. Not being a religious man I've no idea why people get so pissed off with you, but someone probably does.
I don't think antisemitism is because of their religion. Most of the antisemitism I've seen seems to be based around Jews being some kind of sneaky, powerful, controlling puppet masters using their wealth and influence to maintain and further their advantages.Explains why Corbynites hate them, at least
amusingduck said:
Willy Nilly said:
Jews need to stop playing the holocaust card. It was a long time ago and while very bad, things have changed. However, it might be an idea to have a think about why your religion rubs many people up the wrong way. Not being a religious man I've no idea why people get so pissed off with you, but someone probably does.
I don't think antisemitism is because of their religion. Most of the antisemitism I've seen seems to be based around Jews being some kind of sneaky, powerful, controlling puppet masters using their wealth and influence to maintain and further their advantages.Explains why Corbynites hate them, at least
jimPH said:
Michael is indecently exposing himself
Jason kicks Michel in the nuts, full force, Michael falls down
Bob sees Jason kick Michael and intervenes, incoherent shouting ensues before some shoving and a poor attempt at a fight
Seems not to work.
Fixed that for you.Jason kicks Michel in the nuts, full force, Michael falls down
Bob sees Jason kick Michael and intervenes, incoherent shouting ensues before some shoving and a poor attempt at a fight
Seems not to work.
As I said, you're assuming that people are rational and have a good awareness of the situation which is very rarely the case. The fact of the matter is, people act irrationally and tend not to wait for explanations. Also, Murphy's and Sod's laws.
Edited by captain_cynic on Friday 27th April 10:31
Bobberoo99 said:
amusingduck said:
Willy Nilly said:
Jews need to stop playing the holocaust card. It was a long time ago and while very bad, things have changed. However, it might be an idea to have a think about why your religion rubs many people up the wrong way. Not being a religious man I've no idea why people get so pissed off with you, but someone probably does.
I don't think antisemitism is because of their religion. Most of the antisemitism I've seen seems to be based around Jews being some kind of sneaky, powerful, controlling puppet masters using their wealth and influence to maintain and further their advantages.Explains why Corbynites hate them, at least
IJB1959 said:
These days the big issue with Jews and anti semitism is with 'the state of Israel' being a land grab from the Arabs. Cobynites are friends of Hamas so no wonder.
I usually give you the benefit of the doubt because you can usually enunciate yourself clearly enough in an argument... But that is utter b
ks. Considering that in 1946... the land wasn't Arab, it was British. We took it from the Ottoman Turks in WWI. It hasn't been Arab held in centuries.
I view the Palestinians as being just as culpable as the Israelis in that conflict. Each time the Palestinians lost land, it was due to a conflict they lost. Even when they regained the land via negotiation they were daft enough to get into another conflict over it. Same goes for the other Arab nations, Egypt lost the Sinai in the 6 day war, but Israel gave it back via negotiation (they never returned the Golan heights to Lebanon... but that's for obvious reasons).
Antisemitism in western nations is almost always either racially based (I.E. KKK-style) or the old trope of "jew bankers".
Not sure why you needed to say anything about Corbyn... but that just makes you sound unhinged and unattached to reality.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff