For starters, I have never ever indicated that all dogs should be banned. The one consistent thing about your posts is that you always distort what others have said. It makes communication near impossible. And to suggest that pitbull attack victims deserve to be attacked because they believe the breed should be banned or regulated is the most absurd suggestion I have ever heard. It's the equivalent of suggesting a citizen should be murdered for supporting homicide laws. Or that victims of drunk drivers deserve to be injured or killed by drunk drivers because they support drink driving laws. Or those that have been stolen from deserve to be because they believe in private property.
Like I said, this peculiar form of ridiculousness is the norm here at Getbig, but in the real world,there are many more with opinions like mine, opinions that have led to pitbulls being regulated all around the world. Where I live we even have anti hoon laws, laws to protect innocent people from the type of reckless driving Paul Walker promoted. And Paul Walker didn't die from an accident. Accidents happen when you take all the relevant precautions and bad shit still happens. Paul walker died from an act of recklessness that he himself promoted, it was no accident, but the inevitable consequence of repeated reckless behaviour. Paul Walker died from a form of negligence, a form of which he himself endorsed.
Fortunately for me, while your ridiculousness is in the majority here at Getbig, in the real world, decent people actually care about not putting other people at risk. If you live your life based on the principle you win/others lose you will continue to be a despised figure. Intelligent people look for win/win scenarios. So, responsible people who want to drive at excessive speed and in a dangerous manner, find a race course to do it and take the necessary precautions to prevent injury to themselves and to other people. That way it is a win for them and a win for innocent people who don't want to die a violent death due to other peoples thrill seeking behaviour.
The sad thing is, it isn't just mine and my loved ones lives such irresponsible people put at risk, it is yours too. But, a growing trend I notice amongst people is a complete disregard for their own self preservation. They are more concerned about the right to act in self destructive ways and expose other people to harm or death, even if it means it may indeed be themselves who are killed by others who also adopt such a philosophy. By advocating the way you do, you show a profound disregard for your own life, a sign of chronic low self esteem. Just because you are prepared to die at the hands of an irresponsible imbecile, doesn't mean the rest of us are. Some of us are content in our non thrill seeking lifestyles, respecting the rights and concerns of others and the lure of living a long healthy life.
If everyone believed as you did, that worrying about the negative outcome our actions may have on others as unimportant, society would descend into anarchy. The whole time innocent people are being seriously injured and killed by such people, yes, society will be angst ridden and doomed. I don't believe this way because I am altruistic, it is in my best interest too. Respecting the rights of others improves my chances of them respecting mine. If like you, you refuse to respect other peoples Universal Human Right to safety and security, it is unlikely they will be concerned about yours.
Using your logic, you have the right to act in a dangerous manner and kill someone and that is acceptable based on your so called right to have some fun. I can just imagine the spiel you would give to the Judge now "In all fairness your honour, I think you are just being a bitter twisted reactive individual who has never lived. You are the type to have everyone around you living a life of complete and utter worthlessness by insisting that people can't be reckless and expose innocent people to unnecessary actuarial risk. Your honour, I think you should just get over the fact imbeciles kill innocent people for thrills, and acknowledge my right to act anyway I please because to do otherwise would be a boring existence." HHMM, I am just wondering how such a defense would go?
Quote from: E-Kul on Today at 05:47:04 PM
Fortunately for me, while your ridiculousness is in the majority here at Getbig, in the real world, decent people actually care about not putting other people at risk. If you live your life based on the principle you win/others lose you will continue to be a despised figure. Intelligent people look for win/win scenarios. So, responsible people who want to drive at excessive speed and in a dangerous manner, find a race course to do it and take the necessary precautions to prevent injury to themselves and to other people. That way it is a win for them and a win for innocent people who don't want to die a violent death due to other peoples thrill seeking behaviour.
The sad thing is, it isn't just mine and my loved ones lives such irresponsible people put at risk, it is yours too. But, a growing trend I notice amongst people is a complete disregard for their own self preservation. They are more concerned about the right to act in self destructive ways and expose other people to harm or death, even if it means it may indeed be themselves who are killed by others who also adopt such a philosophy. By advocating the way you do, you show a profound disregard for your own life, a sign of chronic low self esteem. Just because you are prepared to die at the hands of an irresponsible imbecile, doesn't mean the rest of us are. Some of us are content in our non thrill seeking lifestyles, respecting the rights and concerns of others and the lure of living a long healthy life.
If everyone believed as you did, that worrying about the negative outcome our actions may have on others as unimportant, society would descend into anarchy. The whole time innocent people are being seriously injured and killed by such people, yes, society will be angst ridden and doomed. I don't believe this way because I am altruistic, it is in my best interest too. Respecting the rights of others improves my chances of them respecting mine. If like you, you refuse to respect other peoples Universal Human Right to safety and security, it is unlikely they will be concerned about yours.
Using your logic, you have the right to act in a dangerous manner and kill someone and that is acceptable based on your so called right to have some fun. I can just imagine the spiel you would give to the Judge now "In all fairness your honour, I think you are just being a bitter twisted reactive individual who has never lived. You are the type to have everyone around you living a life of complete and utter worthlessness by insisting that people can't be reckless and expose innocent people to unnecessary actuarial risk. Your honour, I think you should just get over the fact imbeciles kill innocent people for thrills, and acknowledge my right to act anyway I please because to do otherwise would be a boring existence." HHMM, I am just wondering how such a defense would go?
LMAO @ ''NOBODY claiming e-kul is owning anyone when he is writing a book in the process. loloollolllool 
