Datasets:

---

innovation-hacking2

/

shitposting_dataset5

like 0

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”" ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!" ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians" ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”.." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5" ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you" ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh..." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh...", ">\n\nOrthodox Christmas, Unorthodox ceasefire." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh...", ">\n\nOrthodox Christmas, Unorthodox ceasefire.", ">\n\nThat's like when me and my little brother used to insist we weren't punching each other in the back seat...\n(we were absolutely beating the hell out of one another btw...)" ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh...", ">\n\nOrthodox Christmas, Unorthodox ceasefire.", ">\n\nThat's like when me and my little brother used to insist we weren't punching each other in the back seat...\n(we were absolutely beating the hell out of one another btw...)", ">\n\nDoes numb nuts not know what ceasefire really means?" ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh...", ">\n\nOrthodox Christmas, Unorthodox ceasefire.", ">\n\nThat's like when me and my little brother used to insist we weren't punching each other in the back seat...\n(we were absolutely beating the hell out of one another btw...)", ">\n\nDoes numb nuts not know what ceasefire really means?", ">\n\nThe desperation they're showing is staggering. Ukraine and the rest of the world know theyre full of shit, so you'd have to think this is some sort of propaganda pr campaig? Only problem is the Russian people know they're lying so what's the point?" ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh...", ">\n\nOrthodox Christmas, Unorthodox ceasefire.", ">\n\nThat's like when me and my little brother used to insist we weren't punching each other in the back seat...\n(we were absolutely beating the hell out of one another btw...)", ">\n\nDoes numb nuts not know what ceasefire really means?", ">\n\nThe desperation they're showing is staggering. Ukraine and the rest of the world know theyre full of shit, so you'd have to think this is some sort of propaganda pr campaig? Only problem is the Russian people know they're lying so what's the point?", ">\n\nI really thought they would go with, Ukraine rejected our cease fire so we aren't observing it either but they went with, ignore all the shellings and offensives the ceasefire is totally on. The lying is truly pathological." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh...", ">\n\nOrthodox Christmas, Unorthodox ceasefire.", ">\n\nThat's like when me and my little brother used to insist we weren't punching each other in the back seat...\n(we were absolutely beating the hell out of one another btw...)", ">\n\nDoes numb nuts not know what ceasefire really means?", ">\n\nThe desperation they're showing is staggering. Ukraine and the rest of the world know theyre full of shit, so you'd have to think this is some sort of propaganda pr campaig? Only problem is the Russian people know they're lying so what's the point?", ">\n\nI really thought they would go with, Ukraine rejected our cease fire so we aren't observing it either but they went with, ignore all the shellings and offensives the ceasefire is totally on. The lying is truly pathological.", ">\n\nIt isn't Russia's fault everyone misinterpreted the calls for a unilateral ceasefire to mean that the Russian side would be the one observing it instead of Ukraine. Also, Russia never said how many of their guns would be ceasing fire" ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh...", ">\n\nOrthodox Christmas, Unorthodox ceasefire.", ">\n\nThat's like when me and my little brother used to insist we weren't punching each other in the back seat...\n(we were absolutely beating the hell out of one another btw...)", ">\n\nDoes numb nuts not know what ceasefire really means?", ">\n\nThe desperation they're showing is staggering. Ukraine and the rest of the world know theyre full of shit, so you'd have to think this is some sort of propaganda pr campaig? Only problem is the Russian people know they're lying so what's the point?", ">\n\nI really thought they would go with, Ukraine rejected our cease fire so we aren't observing it either but they went with, ignore all the shellings and offensives the ceasefire is totally on. The lying is truly pathological.", ">\n\nIt isn't Russia's fault everyone misinterpreted the calls for a unilateral ceasefire to mean that the Russian side would be the one observing it instead of Ukraine. Also, Russia never said how many of their guns would be ceasing fire", ">\n\nThis is a false statement headline but ok" ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh...", ">\n\nOrthodox Christmas, Unorthodox ceasefire.", ">\n\nThat's like when me and my little brother used to insist we weren't punching each other in the back seat...\n(we were absolutely beating the hell out of one another btw...)", ">\n\nDoes numb nuts not know what ceasefire really means?", ">\n\nThe desperation they're showing is staggering. Ukraine and the rest of the world know theyre full of shit, so you'd have to think this is some sort of propaganda pr campaig? Only problem is the Russian people know they're lying so what's the point?", ">\n\nI really thought they would go with, Ukraine rejected our cease fire so we aren't observing it either but they went with, ignore all the shellings and offensives the ceasefire is totally on. The lying is truly pathological.", ">\n\nIt isn't Russia's fault everyone misinterpreted the calls for a unilateral ceasefire to mean that the Russian side would be the one observing it instead of Ukraine. Also, Russia never said how many of their guns would be ceasing fire", ">\n\nThis is a false statement headline but ok", ">\n\nComical. They launched one of the largest attacks on Soledar and captured it during their “ceasefire.”" ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh...", ">\n\nOrthodox Christmas, Unorthodox ceasefire.", ">\n\nThat's like when me and my little brother used to insist we weren't punching each other in the back seat...\n(we were absolutely beating the hell out of one another btw...)", ">\n\nDoes numb nuts not know what ceasefire really means?", ">\n\nThe desperation they're showing is staggering. Ukraine and the rest of the world know theyre full of shit, so you'd have to think this is some sort of propaganda pr campaig? Only problem is the Russian people know they're lying so what's the point?", ">\n\nI really thought they would go with, Ukraine rejected our cease fire so we aren't observing it either but they went with, ignore all the shellings and offensives the ceasefire is totally on. The lying is truly pathological.", ">\n\nIt isn't Russia's fault everyone misinterpreted the calls for a unilateral ceasefire to mean that the Russian side would be the one observing it instead of Ukraine. Also, Russia never said how many of their guns would be ceasing fire", ">\n\nThis is a false statement headline but ok", ">\n\nComical. They launched one of the largest attacks on Soledar and captured it during their “ceasefire.”", ">\n\nNeither of them is \"observing a ceasefire.\" Are we children?" ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh...", ">\n\nOrthodox Christmas, Unorthodox ceasefire.", ">\n\nThat's like when me and my little brother used to insist we weren't punching each other in the back seat...\n(we were absolutely beating the hell out of one another btw...)", ">\n\nDoes numb nuts not know what ceasefire really means?", ">\n\nThe desperation they're showing is staggering. Ukraine and the rest of the world know theyre full of shit, so you'd have to think this is some sort of propaganda pr campaig? Only problem is the Russian people know they're lying so what's the point?", ">\n\nI really thought they would go with, Ukraine rejected our cease fire so we aren't observing it either but they went with, ignore all the shellings and offensives the ceasefire is totally on. The lying is truly pathological.", ">\n\nIt isn't Russia's fault everyone misinterpreted the calls for a unilateral ceasefire to mean that the Russian side would be the one observing it instead of Ukraine. Also, Russia never said how many of their guns would be ceasing fire", ">\n\nThis is a false statement headline but ok", ">\n\nComical. They launched one of the largest attacks on Soledar and captured it during their “ceasefire.”", ">\n\nNeither of them is \"observing a ceasefire.\" Are we children?", ">\n\nWhat? We’re observing the ceasefire. We’re observing the Ukrainians having a ceasefire. Oh? Observing doesn’t just mean acknowledging and then carrying on? Oh." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh...", ">\n\nOrthodox Christmas, Unorthodox ceasefire.", ">\n\nThat's like when me and my little brother used to insist we weren't punching each other in the back seat...\n(we were absolutely beating the hell out of one another btw...)", ">\n\nDoes numb nuts not know what ceasefire really means?", ">\n\nThe desperation they're showing is staggering. Ukraine and the rest of the world know theyre full of shit, so you'd have to think this is some sort of propaganda pr campaig? Only problem is the Russian people know they're lying so what's the point?", ">\n\nI really thought they would go with, Ukraine rejected our cease fire so we aren't observing it either but they went with, ignore all the shellings and offensives the ceasefire is totally on. The lying is truly pathological.", ">\n\nIt isn't Russia's fault everyone misinterpreted the calls for a unilateral ceasefire to mean that the Russian side would be the one observing it instead of Ukraine. Also, Russia never said how many of their guns would be ceasing fire", ">\n\nThis is a false statement headline but ok", ">\n\nComical. They launched one of the largest attacks on Soledar and captured it during their “ceasefire.”", ">\n\nNeither of them is \"observing a ceasefire.\" Are we children?", ">\n\nWhat? We’re observing the ceasefire. We’re observing the Ukrainians having a ceasefire. Oh? Observing doesn’t just mean acknowledging and then carrying on? Oh.", ">\n\nKramatorsk under rocket attack. Ceasefire my ass." ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh...", ">\n\nOrthodox Christmas, Unorthodox ceasefire.", ">\n\nThat's like when me and my little brother used to insist we weren't punching each other in the back seat...\n(we were absolutely beating the hell out of one another btw...)", ">\n\nDoes numb nuts not know what ceasefire really means?", ">\n\nThe desperation they're showing is staggering. Ukraine and the rest of the world know theyre full of shit, so you'd have to think this is some sort of propaganda pr campaig? Only problem is the Russian people know they're lying so what's the point?", ">\n\nI really thought they would go with, Ukraine rejected our cease fire so we aren't observing it either but they went with, ignore all the shellings and offensives the ceasefire is totally on. The lying is truly pathological.", ">\n\nIt isn't Russia's fault everyone misinterpreted the calls for a unilateral ceasefire to mean that the Russian side would be the one observing it instead of Ukraine. Also, Russia never said how many of their guns would be ceasing fire", ">\n\nThis is a false statement headline but ok", ">\n\nComical. They launched one of the largest attacks on Soledar and captured it during their “ceasefire.”", ">\n\nNeither of them is \"observing a ceasefire.\" Are we children?", ">\n\nWhat? We’re observing the ceasefire. We’re observing the Ukrainians having a ceasefire. Oh? Observing doesn’t just mean acknowledging and then carrying on? Oh.", ">\n\nKramatorsk under rocket attack. Ceasefire my ass.", ">\n\nYeah, Kyiv, stop hitting yourself" ]

[ "Russia: “Why does no one trust us?”", ">\n\nThis reminds me of years ago when Russian gamers were complaining about always being the bad guys in video games.", ">\n\nAs in part of the storyline or when they end up on your team in competitive play? In my experience they're often some of the biggest shitheads to play with online as well.\nI'm reading this as:\n\"Guy who swears at team and calls them all loser n____r f__s is upset his culture is often portrayed as the villains in gaming\"", ">\n\nThe bad guy in the storylines. Every time a Call of Duty that has Russia as the bad guys came out, there was always a lot of Russian gamer ‘outrage.’ Most recently in 2019 but it goes at least back to the late 00s.\n\nRussian student Alexander Panarin says he loves to play video games and has since he was a kid. But he says he is bothered by the fact Russians are always the bad guys, even in modern video games and movies. Panarin says it is only a video game, but he thinks it is offensive for his fellow Russians. He thinks it would actually be great to win against the Americans.\nSweden-based game developer Gordon Van Dyke produces the video game, \"Bad Company.\" Van Dyke says a lot of times the games are inspired by what is going on in the news and Russia's invasion of Georgia, in August 2008, put Moscow back in the spotlight.", ">\n\nIt's funny because lots of countries often seem upset when the US portrays them as villains in film (with the US/West being heroes) yet ignores the many other variety of movies also portrays fighting against corrupt elements in the US or Western society", ">\n\nBecause the us is arguably still the heroes of such stories, its just the noble people of America vs a villainous government. There are vanishing few stories that I can think of where the conflict is us vs an external nation with the us being the villain.\nEdit:at least in terms of what ever makes its way to American audiences, im sure its much easier to find such stories the the middle east or south America", ">\n\nYeah I commented about the Bourne trilogy which is exactly what you mentioned, a heroic American exposing corrupt Americans within his own institution. I think it's because Hollywood knows its main audience is Americans and movies just sell better when the hero has a background that's somewhat relatable. An American movie may sell well with the Americans or the CIA as the bad guys but if you make the hero a foreign nation instead of a \"good American\" then I'm sure you'd see sales plummet.", ">\n\nJust like they were 'observing' Ukraine's sovereignty and just like they 'observed' safety corridors for civilians.\nFuck you ruzzia.", ">\n\nRussia. If the \"not really mercenaries\" do it.. its not our fault....everyone will believe that.", ">\n\nif a country could be a clown, it would be Russia.", ">\n\nThey’d be a sad clown", ">\n\nThey'd be an alcoholic abusive Krusty the clown.", ">\n\nThey'd be child-murderer Pennywise.\nWait, Pennywise was competent", ">\n\nIt’s like they’re actively trying to be as ridiculously dishonest as possible", ">\n\nIt's Russia. Dishonesty comes naturally to them....in fact dishonesty is about the only thing you can rely on Russia for.", ">\n\nTop export as well, you can see it on Tuckers show if you want to rot your brain.", ">\n\nI don’t trust Russia", ">\n\nNobody trusts Russia.", ">\n\nIf you are a russian invader standing on Ukrainian soil, expect to have bullets, mortars, rockets, grenades and assorted shrapnel coming at you whether you shoot your weapon or not. You can avoid this by leaving. That is all.", ">\n\nYet again more propaganda for the Russian masses that haven't felt any or only minor issues from the war.\nI don't think anyone sane in the west believes this and those who say they do believe are either brainwashed by Russian propaganda, paid astroturfers or idiots that think dictatorial/facist rule is the way to go.\nEdit: If you can't control your army or the mercenaries you bought, are you really in control anymore?", ">\n\nHonestly, those actually make me feel a little more like they won't use nukes. When they start pushing hard for peace and disarmament is when I expect something like that.", ">\n\n\"Insist\" but you still fire weapons on supposed \"cease fire\". Putin, you are mother fuc*ing liar (as usual).", ">\n\nSpeech check failed, Russia. You'll need more points in charisma to get that load of crap past everyone.", ">\n\nIf you believe a word that comes out of Putin you deserve to get hoodwinked.", ">\n\nNobody with good intentions deserves to get hoodwinked, those with bad intentions however…", ">\n\nThat's like when your brother pins you down and uses your hands to hit you, and yells: \"Stop hitting yourself.... Stop hitting yourself...\"...", ">\n\nWe moved past \"When Russians open their mouths they lie\" to \"When Russians breathe they lie\".", ">\n\nIf you believed that Russia would abide by its own ceasefire, I’ve got a bridge in the Kerch Strait to sell you.", ">\n\n“We have ceased firing…some things at other things”", ">\n\nHow stupid ruzzia to think the world believes their lies?!!", ">\n\nBullshit. Its a ruse to resupply their dwindling forces.", ">\n\nFuck the russians", ">\n\nRussia is also amazing at rejecting reality and replacing it with their own.", ">\n\nAhh, the classic “Ukraine firing rocket at themselves”..", ">\n\nAnyone that believes anything Putin says is a gullible idiot - like those MAGA idiots.", ">\n\nThe gaslighting is just, wow. Makes sense now why Trump is always so good at it: he learned from a master. His master. For whom his mouth is a cockholster.", ">\n\nGotta be honest, I’m not a fan of Trump but there is nothing in this world that annoys me more than how, 2 years after he left office, so many people are so obsessed with him that they cannot talk about anything without bringing his name up. Or how the left has developed the strategy of implying that whoever they don’t like is either working with or friends with Putin, even if what they are claiming or implying were disproven years ago. The more you let dude live in your head rent free the more the obsession clouds your judgement. Stop it.", ">\n\nYou don't understand why the man who threatened Ukraine defence aid in order to blackmail them is being talked about right now, as America is rushing aid to Ukraine so they can defend themselves from an invasion Trump praised? You don't understand why the man who led the biggest attack on American democracy (and is still attempting to overthrow it in the present) is being talked about?\nSmarten up.", ">\n\nI've seen this move from senator Palatine.", ">\n\nNah, even Palpatine wasn't this blatant a liar, not to the public anyway.", ">\n\nThis is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 69%. (I'm a bot)\n\n\nAFP |. Moscow insisted Saturday its army was observing a ceasefire in Ukraine to mark Orthodox Christmas despite artillery attacks by Kyiv troops.\n\"Despite the shelling of the armed forces of Ukraine of settlements and Russian positions, the implementation of the declared ceasefire will be continued,\" the Russian defence ministry said in a statement.\nUkraine has dismissed the halt - due to last until the end of Saturday - as a tactic by Russia to gain time to regroup its forces and bolster its defences following a series of battlefield setbacks.\n\n\nExtended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: forces^#1 Russian^#2 Ukraine^#3 Saturday^#4 attacks^#5", ">\n\nI don't think Russia can not lie about everything. They are at the stage now of just putting out random statements and hoping somebody believes them. If you believe anything then more fool you", ">\n\nUh huh...", ">\n\nOrthodox Christmas, Unorthodox ceasefire.", ">\n\nThat's like when me and my little brother used to insist we weren't punching each other in the back seat...\n(we were absolutely beating the hell out of one another btw...)", ">\n\nDoes numb nuts not know what ceasefire really means?", ">\n\nThe desperation they're showing is staggering. Ukraine and the rest of the world know theyre full of shit, so you'd have to think this is some sort of propaganda pr campaig? Only problem is the Russian people know they're lying so what's the point?", ">\n\nI really thought they would go with, Ukraine rejected our cease fire so we aren't observing it either but they went with, ignore all the shellings and offensives the ceasefire is totally on. The lying is truly pathological.", ">\n\nIt isn't Russia's fault everyone misinterpreted the calls for a unilateral ceasefire to mean that the Russian side would be the one observing it instead of Ukraine. Also, Russia never said how many of their guns would be ceasing fire", ">\n\nThis is a false statement headline but ok", ">\n\nComical. They launched one of the largest attacks on Soledar and captured it during their “ceasefire.”", ">\n\nNeither of them is \"observing a ceasefire.\" Are we children?", ">\n\nWhat? We’re observing the ceasefire. We’re observing the Ukrainians having a ceasefire. Oh? Observing doesn’t just mean acknowledging and then carrying on? Oh.", ">\n\nKramatorsk under rocket attack. Ceasefire my ass.", ">\n\nYeah, Kyiv, stop hitting yourself", ">\n\n2 dead and 13 in hospital in Bakmut is ceasefire \ntry to critique us for fuck russians for their ceasefire" ]

[]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that." ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell." ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards." ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone." ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol" ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me." ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things." ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things.", ">\n\nExcept most of the network shows are kinda bad, and radio music is utterly dire if you have even slightly 'niche' tastes" ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things.", ">\n\nExcept most of the network shows are kinda bad, and radio music is utterly dire if you have even slightly 'niche' tastes", ">\n\nI agree, i think its nostalgia for me...Me being a little kid rushing to get home from school, to watch cartoon network was a better feeling than any streaming service now...shows like Dragon Ball Z, Ben 10, etc on Cable are what made my childhood..\nAlso blockbuster was always better then renting a movie from home, or netflix" ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things.", ">\n\nExcept most of the network shows are kinda bad, and radio music is utterly dire if you have even slightly 'niche' tastes", ">\n\nI agree, i think its nostalgia for me...Me being a little kid rushing to get home from school, to watch cartoon network was a better feeling than any streaming service now...shows like Dragon Ball Z, Ben 10, etc on Cable are what made my childhood..\nAlso blockbuster was always better then renting a movie from home, or netflix", ">\n\nStreaming was only attractive to me due to the cost and a la carte option. Now that its as, or more expensive, as pay tv, its lost its appeal. DvRs solved the scheduling issues for must watch shows, but I was always almost watching live tv anyways." ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things.", ">\n\nExcept most of the network shows are kinda bad, and radio music is utterly dire if you have even slightly 'niche' tastes", ">\n\nI agree, i think its nostalgia for me...Me being a little kid rushing to get home from school, to watch cartoon network was a better feeling than any streaming service now...shows like Dragon Ball Z, Ben 10, etc on Cable are what made my childhood..\nAlso blockbuster was always better then renting a movie from home, or netflix", ">\n\nStreaming was only attractive to me due to the cost and a la carte option. Now that its as, or more expensive, as pay tv, its lost its appeal. DvRs solved the scheduling issues for must watch shows, but I was always almost watching live tv anyways.", ">\n\nAre you 80?" ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things.", ">\n\nExcept most of the network shows are kinda bad, and radio music is utterly dire if you have even slightly 'niche' tastes", ">\n\nI agree, i think its nostalgia for me...Me being a little kid rushing to get home from school, to watch cartoon network was a better feeling than any streaming service now...shows like Dragon Ball Z, Ben 10, etc on Cable are what made my childhood..\nAlso blockbuster was always better then renting a movie from home, or netflix", ">\n\nStreaming was only attractive to me due to the cost and a la carte option. Now that its as, or more expensive, as pay tv, its lost its appeal. DvRs solved the scheduling issues for must watch shows, but I was always almost watching live tv anyways.", ">\n\nAre you 80?", ">\n\nNice try cable company but not today" ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things.", ">\n\nExcept most of the network shows are kinda bad, and radio music is utterly dire if you have even slightly 'niche' tastes", ">\n\nI agree, i think its nostalgia for me...Me being a little kid rushing to get home from school, to watch cartoon network was a better feeling than any streaming service now...shows like Dragon Ball Z, Ben 10, etc on Cable are what made my childhood..\nAlso blockbuster was always better then renting a movie from home, or netflix", ">\n\nStreaming was only attractive to me due to the cost and a la carte option. Now that its as, or more expensive, as pay tv, its lost its appeal. DvRs solved the scheduling issues for must watch shows, but I was always almost watching live tv anyways.", ">\n\nAre you 80?", ">\n\nNice try cable company but not today", ">\n\nLol" ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things.", ">\n\nExcept most of the network shows are kinda bad, and radio music is utterly dire if you have even slightly 'niche' tastes", ">\n\nI agree, i think its nostalgia for me...Me being a little kid rushing to get home from school, to watch cartoon network was a better feeling than any streaming service now...shows like Dragon Ball Z, Ben 10, etc on Cable are what made my childhood..\nAlso blockbuster was always better then renting a movie from home, or netflix", ">\n\nStreaming was only attractive to me due to the cost and a la carte option. Now that its as, or more expensive, as pay tv, its lost its appeal. DvRs solved the scheduling issues for must watch shows, but I was always almost watching live tv anyways.", ">\n\nAre you 80?", ">\n\nNice try cable company but not today", ">\n\nLol", ">\n\nStrong disagree. There's a reason I barely kept up with TV until streaming became a thing. Having to work my schedule around a TV show or remembering to program your VCR was a pain in the ass. That's not to mention you're SOL if there's a power or cable outage, breaking news, or a sports event running long which preempts your show." ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things.", ">\n\nExcept most of the network shows are kinda bad, and radio music is utterly dire if you have even slightly 'niche' tastes", ">\n\nI agree, i think its nostalgia for me...Me being a little kid rushing to get home from school, to watch cartoon network was a better feeling than any streaming service now...shows like Dragon Ball Z, Ben 10, etc on Cable are what made my childhood..\nAlso blockbuster was always better then renting a movie from home, or netflix", ">\n\nStreaming was only attractive to me due to the cost and a la carte option. Now that its as, or more expensive, as pay tv, its lost its appeal. DvRs solved the scheduling issues for must watch shows, but I was always almost watching live tv anyways.", ">\n\nAre you 80?", ">\n\nNice try cable company but not today", ">\n\nLol", ">\n\nStrong disagree. There's a reason I barely kept up with TV until streaming became a thing. Having to work my schedule around a TV show or remembering to program your VCR was a pain in the ass. That's not to mention you're SOL if there's a power or cable outage, breaking news, or a sports event running long which preempts your show.", ">\n\nSuper lame. I'm not paying extra money to have me fed ads. This is 2023, in all other situations you pay for add free services, not the other way around. No way in hell am I paying more for less convenience and quality." ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things.", ">\n\nExcept most of the network shows are kinda bad, and radio music is utterly dire if you have even slightly 'niche' tastes", ">\n\nI agree, i think its nostalgia for me...Me being a little kid rushing to get home from school, to watch cartoon network was a better feeling than any streaming service now...shows like Dragon Ball Z, Ben 10, etc on Cable are what made my childhood..\nAlso blockbuster was always better then renting a movie from home, or netflix", ">\n\nStreaming was only attractive to me due to the cost and a la carte option. Now that its as, or more expensive, as pay tv, its lost its appeal. DvRs solved the scheduling issues for must watch shows, but I was always almost watching live tv anyways.", ">\n\nAre you 80?", ">\n\nNice try cable company but not today", ">\n\nLol", ">\n\nStrong disagree. There's a reason I barely kept up with TV until streaming became a thing. Having to work my schedule around a TV show or remembering to program your VCR was a pain in the ass. That's not to mention you're SOL if there's a power or cable outage, breaking news, or a sports event running long which preempts your show.", ">\n\nSuper lame. I'm not paying extra money to have me fed ads. This is 2023, in all other situations you pay for add free services, not the other way around. No way in hell am I paying more for less convenience and quality.", ">\n\nBuddy I gotta tell you about this new thing with Netflix." ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things.", ">\n\nExcept most of the network shows are kinda bad, and radio music is utterly dire if you have even slightly 'niche' tastes", ">\n\nI agree, i think its nostalgia for me...Me being a little kid rushing to get home from school, to watch cartoon network was a better feeling than any streaming service now...shows like Dragon Ball Z, Ben 10, etc on Cable are what made my childhood..\nAlso blockbuster was always better then renting a movie from home, or netflix", ">\n\nStreaming was only attractive to me due to the cost and a la carte option. Now that its as, or more expensive, as pay tv, its lost its appeal. DvRs solved the scheduling issues for must watch shows, but I was always almost watching live tv anyways.", ">\n\nAre you 80?", ">\n\nNice try cable company but not today", ">\n\nLol", ">\n\nStrong disagree. There's a reason I barely kept up with TV until streaming became a thing. Having to work my schedule around a TV show or remembering to program your VCR was a pain in the ass. That's not to mention you're SOL if there's a power or cable outage, breaking news, or a sports event running long which preempts your show.", ">\n\nSuper lame. I'm not paying extra money to have me fed ads. This is 2023, in all other situations you pay for add free services, not the other way around. No way in hell am I paying more for less convenience and quality.", ">\n\nBuddy I gotta tell you about this new thing with Netflix.", ">\n\nBack when that was a thing, I missed out on a lot of popular shows, basically because I refused to structure my life around TV. I still think that literally any activity involving other people is more important than TV." ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things.", ">\n\nExcept most of the network shows are kinda bad, and radio music is utterly dire if you have even slightly 'niche' tastes", ">\n\nI agree, i think its nostalgia for me...Me being a little kid rushing to get home from school, to watch cartoon network was a better feeling than any streaming service now...shows like Dragon Ball Z, Ben 10, etc on Cable are what made my childhood..\nAlso blockbuster was always better then renting a movie from home, or netflix", ">\n\nStreaming was only attractive to me due to the cost and a la carte option. Now that its as, or more expensive, as pay tv, its lost its appeal. DvRs solved the scheduling issues for must watch shows, but I was always almost watching live tv anyways.", ">\n\nAre you 80?", ">\n\nNice try cable company but not today", ">\n\nLol", ">\n\nStrong disagree. There's a reason I barely kept up with TV until streaming became a thing. Having to work my schedule around a TV show or remembering to program your VCR was a pain in the ass. That's not to mention you're SOL if there's a power or cable outage, breaking news, or a sports event running long which preempts your show.", ">\n\nSuper lame. I'm not paying extra money to have me fed ads. This is 2023, in all other situations you pay for add free services, not the other way around. No way in hell am I paying more for less convenience and quality.", ">\n\nBuddy I gotta tell you about this new thing with Netflix.", ">\n\nBack when that was a thing, I missed out on a lot of popular shows, basically because I refused to structure my life around TV. I still think that literally any activity involving other people is more important than TV.", ">\n\nI feel like its always so exciting when something you love watching happens to be on. Like I scroll past Harry Potter for streaming daily because I feel like it’s too long and a waste of time, but whenever Harry Potter is on cable, there’s that excitement of “This doesn’t happen every day” and the satisfaction of landing on something you love watching by chance." ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things.", ">\n\nExcept most of the network shows are kinda bad, and radio music is utterly dire if you have even slightly 'niche' tastes", ">\n\nI agree, i think its nostalgia for me...Me being a little kid rushing to get home from school, to watch cartoon network was a better feeling than any streaming service now...shows like Dragon Ball Z, Ben 10, etc on Cable are what made my childhood..\nAlso blockbuster was always better then renting a movie from home, or netflix", ">\n\nStreaming was only attractive to me due to the cost and a la carte option. Now that its as, or more expensive, as pay tv, its lost its appeal. DvRs solved the scheduling issues for must watch shows, but I was always almost watching live tv anyways.", ">\n\nAre you 80?", ">\n\nNice try cable company but not today", ">\n\nLol", ">\n\nStrong disagree. There's a reason I barely kept up with TV until streaming became a thing. Having to work my schedule around a TV show or remembering to program your VCR was a pain in the ass. That's not to mention you're SOL if there's a power or cable outage, breaking news, or a sports event running long which preempts your show.", ">\n\nSuper lame. I'm not paying extra money to have me fed ads. This is 2023, in all other situations you pay for add free services, not the other way around. No way in hell am I paying more for less convenience and quality.", ">\n\nBuddy I gotta tell you about this new thing with Netflix.", ">\n\nBack when that was a thing, I missed out on a lot of popular shows, basically because I refused to structure my life around TV. I still think that literally any activity involving other people is more important than TV.", ">\n\nI feel like its always so exciting when something you love watching happens to be on. Like I scroll past Harry Potter for streaming daily because I feel like it’s too long and a waste of time, but whenever Harry Potter is on cable, there’s that excitement of “This doesn’t happen every day” and the satisfaction of landing on something you love watching by chance.", ">\n\nIt makes no sense but it's true lol" ]

[ "You didn’t really want to hear about a new Chevy Silverado 3 times during a Seinfeld rerun that has 4 minutes chopped from the original 1996 run time to fit in more 2023 ads.\nYou can admit that.", ">\n\nCouldnt disagree more, I hate ads so much.\nIf ads get involved in streaming then I will stop using them aswell.", ">\n\nNot a majority opinion but I hear/read these sentiments quite often. I tend to agree with some of what you’re saying, especially the excitement that built each week until another episode of Breaking Bad or Sopranos came on again. People built their schedules around the shows, and it led discussions with friends and coworkers afterwards.", ">\n\n\nWith Cable TV you had to have your TV on at the right time if you really wanted to watch a specific movie or TV show. You knew that everyday at 7pm Disney would air movies and you would always try to be in front of your TV during that time. You basically had this cool schedule to watch TV.\n\nBeing forced to schedule your day around the show you want to watch instead of scheduling the show around your life is not a positive. I do prefer weekly releases, tho, but you also get that with streaming (not every time) + the option to watch it when ever it's convenient to you.\n\nIf you missed an episode you could always look up the TV Guide and rewatch it later or ask someone to make a summary of what happened during the episode\n\nThose are both negative things, it's better to be able to watch it anyway if you miss the moment it comes out, and good damn having to ask what happened in the last one sucks. \n\nIf you were not at home when a movie or show was on, you could always program your dvd/vhs recorder and then watch it later.\n\nThat's just streaming with extra steps. \n\nCommercial breaks were quite fun. You had a break to run to the bathroom, make some popcorn on the microwave or run quickly to the shop to buy some food before the movie starts again. Isn't the adrenaline fun?\n\nWhile there's a fun nostalgic feeling about commercial breaks, that's it, a nostalgic feeling, in reality, 9 times out of 10 when you got a commercial break you didn't have to do any of those things, you just sit there complaining about why a 20 minutes show has 15 minutes of adds, but now you look back and only remember the \"fun\" parts of it.\n\nTurning on the TV not knowing what's on at the moment but ending up watching a nice movie was such a nice feeling.\n\nYeah, the art of zapping is something that's lost on tv as many of us are opting for not getting old-school entertainment, but, i'm going to be honest, it's a sacrifice i'm willing to do, at worst i'll just open youtube or twitch and do kinda the same there. \n\nWith streaming services the excitement is gone...\n\nWith this i agree, i think that every streaming service should adopt the weekly format for shows, while keeping the ability to watch it whenever after, this would create a better experience for everyone.", ">\n\nSee, I disagree with all your disagreements lol I think it's just a very personal preference. Besides, unpopular opinion and all lol", ">\n\nNgl I sometimws miss commercial breaks. I struggle with stopping a show/movie midway to do other stuff quickly so commercial breaks were pretty useful. xD\nSame with choosing - I struggle choosing stuff and tv took the decision for me.", ">\n\nThis kind of resembles how I feel about listening to the radio. I like that I don't have control over what I'm going to hear next, just turn it on and see what you get to listen to. The fun of \"yesss I made it in time for insert show here\". All good things.", ">\n\nExcept most of the network shows are kinda bad, and radio music is utterly dire if you have even slightly 'niche' tastes", ">\n\nI agree, i think its nostalgia for me...Me being a little kid rushing to get home from school, to watch cartoon network was a better feeling than any streaming service now...shows like Dragon Ball Z, Ben 10, etc on Cable are what made my childhood..\nAlso blockbuster was always better then renting a movie from home, or netflix", ">\n\nStreaming was only attractive to me due to the cost and a la carte option. Now that its as, or more expensive, as pay tv, its lost its appeal. DvRs solved the scheduling issues for must watch shows, but I was always almost watching live tv anyways.", ">\n\nAre you 80?", ">\n\nNice try cable company but not today", ">\n\nLol", ">\n\nStrong disagree. There's a reason I barely kept up with TV until streaming became a thing. Having to work my schedule around a TV show or remembering to program your VCR was a pain in the ass. That's not to mention you're SOL if there's a power or cable outage, breaking news, or a sports event running long which preempts your show.", ">\n\nSuper lame. I'm not paying extra money to have me fed ads. This is 2023, in all other situations you pay for add free services, not the other way around. No way in hell am I paying more for less convenience and quality.", ">\n\nBuddy I gotta tell you about this new thing with Netflix.", ">\n\nBack when that was a thing, I missed out on a lot of popular shows, basically because I refused to structure my life around TV. I still think that literally any activity involving other people is more important than TV.", ">\n\nI feel like its always so exciting when something you love watching happens to be on. Like I scroll past Harry Potter for streaming daily because I feel like it’s too long and a waste of time, but whenever Harry Potter is on cable, there’s that excitement of “This doesn’t happen every day” and the satisfaction of landing on something you love watching by chance.", ">\n\nIt makes no sense but it's true lol", ">\n\nI fail to see how being forced to adhere to someone else's schedule can be considered fun. Sounds a lot like a job.\nI grew up with no choice but to watch broadcast tv, didn't even have cable until I was an adult out of college. It sucked because you had to make a choice about catching that week's episode of Battlestar Galactica or going roller skating with friends. With streaming you can simply watch a show when you want to watch it." ]

[]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?" ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!" ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood" ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands.", ">\n\nSorry, my friend, but the GOP is making a dedicated push to make voting harder.\nThe explicit purpose is to disproportionately impact the voters who are least likely to vote for them.\nIf you wanna pretend like constitutional violations is only a thing for Democrats and 2A, I guess it's your prerogative to be detached from reality." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands.", ">\n\nSorry, my friend, but the GOP is making a dedicated push to make voting harder.\nThe explicit purpose is to disproportionately impact the voters who are least likely to vote for them.\nIf you wanna pretend like constitutional violations is only a thing for Democrats and 2A, I guess it's your prerogative to be detached from reality.", ">\n\n\nGun enthusiasts nuts do nothing but point out problems even though a problem identified is a problem half solved. \n\nCatchphrases like \"is a problem half solved\" don't do anything, really, other than make one feel better about an empty solution with no chance of success.\nIf there were some magic button to make every gun in the world disappear, and no new ones could ever be made, I would hit that button in a heartbeat - even if it meant my pretty expensive collection just vanished. While I do like guns, the benefits there would easily outweigh the drawbacks.\nBut, that is magical thinking, and useless to contemplate. Similar to some magical computer system that is somehow immune to abuse. There is no such thing.\nThere is nothing in the offered solution that has not been suggested or tried before. Once the obvious, fatal flaws and potentials for abuse in a solution are pointed out, the \"you won't be part of the solution\" accusations start.\nYou want to know why I won't be part of the solution?\nBecause there isn't one. Not the solution you want, anyway - where guns are regulated and controlled and removed from circulation somehow.\nAmerica has painted itself into a corner here. We have the following situation:\n\n400,000,000 guns in civilian hands now. Most in right wing hands. Nothing proposed here does anything about that.\nNot even the wildest of proposals by the Biden admin does anything about the existing weapons in civilian hands.\nThe proposed AR ban lets Bubba keep all his ARs and AKs and ammo, but you can't buy one, if you don't already have it. \nHere is the \"neat\" part. You'd be able to buy one from Bubba, if he wants to make a private sale. What kind of person do you think Bubba would be inclined to sell one of his assault rifles to?\nHeavy taxes on guns and ammo means only the rich can have them.\nLEOs and other enforcement bodies are heavily weighted to the right. The treatment of the BLM protestors clearly shows that they will not enforce laws without bias\nGun ownership is enshrined in the constitution, as well as the American psyche. It will take an amendment to do anything substantial. Zero chance of anything happening there.\n\nThere is no workable chance of doing anything about the massive firepower those on the radical right have hoarded. Nobody, on the left or right, is going to take them away.\nIf my MAGA neighbors get to stay heavily armed with assault weapons, then I want assaault weapons too.\nIt's MAD, on a small scale. But I don't see any better alternative.\nI bet Ukraine wishes they still had their nukes right about now." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands.", ">\n\nSorry, my friend, but the GOP is making a dedicated push to make voting harder.\nThe explicit purpose is to disproportionately impact the voters who are least likely to vote for them.\nIf you wanna pretend like constitutional violations is only a thing for Democrats and 2A, I guess it's your prerogative to be detached from reality.", ">\n\n\nGun enthusiasts nuts do nothing but point out problems even though a problem identified is a problem half solved. \n\nCatchphrases like \"is a problem half solved\" don't do anything, really, other than make one feel better about an empty solution with no chance of success.\nIf there were some magic button to make every gun in the world disappear, and no new ones could ever be made, I would hit that button in a heartbeat - even if it meant my pretty expensive collection just vanished. While I do like guns, the benefits there would easily outweigh the drawbacks.\nBut, that is magical thinking, and useless to contemplate. Similar to some magical computer system that is somehow immune to abuse. There is no such thing.\nThere is nothing in the offered solution that has not been suggested or tried before. Once the obvious, fatal flaws and potentials for abuse in a solution are pointed out, the \"you won't be part of the solution\" accusations start.\nYou want to know why I won't be part of the solution?\nBecause there isn't one. Not the solution you want, anyway - where guns are regulated and controlled and removed from circulation somehow.\nAmerica has painted itself into a corner here. We have the following situation:\n\n400,000,000 guns in civilian hands now. Most in right wing hands. Nothing proposed here does anything about that.\nNot even the wildest of proposals by the Biden admin does anything about the existing weapons in civilian hands.\nThe proposed AR ban lets Bubba keep all his ARs and AKs and ammo, but you can't buy one, if you don't already have it. \nHere is the \"neat\" part. You'd be able to buy one from Bubba, if he wants to make a private sale. What kind of person do you think Bubba would be inclined to sell one of his assault rifles to?\nHeavy taxes on guns and ammo means only the rich can have them.\nLEOs and other enforcement bodies are heavily weighted to the right. The treatment of the BLM protestors clearly shows that they will not enforce laws without bias\nGun ownership is enshrined in the constitution, as well as the American psyche. It will take an amendment to do anything substantial. Zero chance of anything happening there.\n\nThere is no workable chance of doing anything about the massive firepower those on the radical right have hoarded. Nobody, on the left or right, is going to take them away.\nIf my MAGA neighbors get to stay heavily armed with assault weapons, then I want assaault weapons too.\nIt's MAD, on a small scale. But I don't see any better alternative.\nI bet Ukraine wishes they still had their nukes right about now.", ">\n\n\nThe \"abuse\" is a strawman. \n\nNope.\n\nAccessing gun records illegally and against hypothetical federal law has no value to anyone.\n\nThat is a silly statement. Knowledge of someone's gun ownership would have a lot of value to LEOs, unfriendly political foes, angry ex-spouses, etc.\nAnyone who can't see how having that information against one's opponents would be valuable can't be expected to see the inherent flaws with such a database.\n\nJesus, again with this. Please tell me where I mentioned taxes? \n\nYour original point, I believe, was that the plethora of gun laws was the gun nuts fault. You also accused me of not wanting to be part of the solution. My response is there IS no solution, and provided a list of reasons why gun control measures really cannot work effectively in this country.\nIf you want to limit the discussion to that hypothetical database that is magically immune to abuse and hacking, that is fine with me. You need to provide some technical details on how that will work, or it isn't going to gain a lot of traction.\nSaying \"the smart people will figure out the bugs\" is a copout. It is also wrong. \n\nGun people have been repeating dogma for so long that it's basically a programmed response at this point.\n\nThen offer a solution that is not equally tired. Magical databases immune from abuse aren't a solution, nor is the idea unique. \nIt is, however, nonexistent. If you actually work within systems like HIPPA and the NC court systems, you become much less convinced of the effectiveness of their IT security, especially when it is provided at the lowest quote, by the cheapest company willing to do government work." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands.", ">\n\nSorry, my friend, but the GOP is making a dedicated push to make voting harder.\nThe explicit purpose is to disproportionately impact the voters who are least likely to vote for them.\nIf you wanna pretend like constitutional violations is only a thing for Democrats and 2A, I guess it's your prerogative to be detached from reality.", ">\n\n\nGun enthusiasts nuts do nothing but point out problems even though a problem identified is a problem half solved. \n\nCatchphrases like \"is a problem half solved\" don't do anything, really, other than make one feel better about an empty solution with no chance of success.\nIf there were some magic button to make every gun in the world disappear, and no new ones could ever be made, I would hit that button in a heartbeat - even if it meant my pretty expensive collection just vanished. While I do like guns, the benefits there would easily outweigh the drawbacks.\nBut, that is magical thinking, and useless to contemplate. Similar to some magical computer system that is somehow immune to abuse. There is no such thing.\nThere is nothing in the offered solution that has not been suggested or tried before. Once the obvious, fatal flaws and potentials for abuse in a solution are pointed out, the \"you won't be part of the solution\" accusations start.\nYou want to know why I won't be part of the solution?\nBecause there isn't one. Not the solution you want, anyway - where guns are regulated and controlled and removed from circulation somehow.\nAmerica has painted itself into a corner here. We have the following situation:\n\n400,000,000 guns in civilian hands now. Most in right wing hands. Nothing proposed here does anything about that.\nNot even the wildest of proposals by the Biden admin does anything about the existing weapons in civilian hands.\nThe proposed AR ban lets Bubba keep all his ARs and AKs and ammo, but you can't buy one, if you don't already have it. \nHere is the \"neat\" part. You'd be able to buy one from Bubba, if he wants to make a private sale. What kind of person do you think Bubba would be inclined to sell one of his assault rifles to?\nHeavy taxes on guns and ammo means only the rich can have them.\nLEOs and other enforcement bodies are heavily weighted to the right. The treatment of the BLM protestors clearly shows that they will not enforce laws without bias\nGun ownership is enshrined in the constitution, as well as the American psyche. It will take an amendment to do anything substantial. Zero chance of anything happening there.\n\nThere is no workable chance of doing anything about the massive firepower those on the radical right have hoarded. Nobody, on the left or right, is going to take them away.\nIf my MAGA neighbors get to stay heavily armed with assault weapons, then I want assaault weapons too.\nIt's MAD, on a small scale. But I don't see any better alternative.\nI bet Ukraine wishes they still had their nukes right about now.", ">\n\n\nThe \"abuse\" is a strawman. \n\nNope.\n\nAccessing gun records illegally and against hypothetical federal law has no value to anyone.\n\nThat is a silly statement. Knowledge of someone's gun ownership would have a lot of value to LEOs, unfriendly political foes, angry ex-spouses, etc.\nAnyone who can't see how having that information against one's opponents would be valuable can't be expected to see the inherent flaws with such a database.\n\nJesus, again with this. Please tell me where I mentioned taxes? \n\nYour original point, I believe, was that the plethora of gun laws was the gun nuts fault. You also accused me of not wanting to be part of the solution. My response is there IS no solution, and provided a list of reasons why gun control measures really cannot work effectively in this country.\nIf you want to limit the discussion to that hypothetical database that is magically immune to abuse and hacking, that is fine with me. You need to provide some technical details on how that will work, or it isn't going to gain a lot of traction.\nSaying \"the smart people will figure out the bugs\" is a copout. It is also wrong. \n\nGun people have been repeating dogma for so long that it's basically a programmed response at this point.\n\nThen offer a solution that is not equally tired. Magical databases immune from abuse aren't a solution, nor is the idea unique. \nIt is, however, nonexistent. If you actually work within systems like HIPPA and the NC court systems, you become much less convinced of the effectiveness of their IT security, especially when it is provided at the lowest quote, by the cheapest company willing to do government work.", ">\n\n\nBut it's not valuable because it's not actionable information.\n\nLet's say a husband and wife separate. The wife is afraid of her ex, and buys a handgun just in case.\nSomeone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web. The husband finds out she now has a tan Glock 19. He goes over to drop something off at her location. The encounter is uneventful. He now goes and files a report that she brandished and threatened him with a tan glock 19.\nActionable.\nAn LEO, like that racist sheriff I linked to way back in the thread, decides he wants to fuck over the black guy at the last city council meeting, who was complaining about police abuse. He checks the records, does not even need the dark web, finds out the guy he hates owns an AR15. Same operation as last time. Go out there for a nondescript reason, and oh my god he brandished an AR15\nTime for a swat visit, or fuck, just shoot him. We know there is a rifle in there somewhere.\nActionable.\nA left wing politician owns several firearms for personal defense, but publicly is very anti-gun, because that is how the wind blows in the Dem party. Someone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web - or, that info is provided from a sympathetic operative with appropriate access. The left wing politician's political opponents get that information, and then publish his hypocrisy for all to see. The left wing politician loses his next election.\nActionable.\n​\n\nwhat I did say was that hacked information is next to useless.\n\nThat is wrong, though. That info is easily acted on by bad people.\n​\n\nIt's literally part of every single product that has ever been developed since the beginning of time. There is not one product on the face of this planet that has been 100% perfect in the very first try.\n\nOne hack is all it would take, and all that information is available to anyone that wants to download it. \nAnd, I really do not get where the inherent trust of the govt officials that would be in charge of this comes from. You saw how norms and controls and precedents were completely ignored when the Trump admin was in power. There are no real checks and balances any more. If there is a national database of gun owners and their weapons, any technical controls and limits you put on it can be bypassed by a corrupt administration." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands.", ">\n\nSorry, my friend, but the GOP is making a dedicated push to make voting harder.\nThe explicit purpose is to disproportionately impact the voters who are least likely to vote for them.\nIf you wanna pretend like constitutional violations is only a thing for Democrats and 2A, I guess it's your prerogative to be detached from reality.", ">\n\n\nGun enthusiasts nuts do nothing but point out problems even though a problem identified is a problem half solved. \n\nCatchphrases like \"is a problem half solved\" don't do anything, really, other than make one feel better about an empty solution with no chance of success.\nIf there were some magic button to make every gun in the world disappear, and no new ones could ever be made, I would hit that button in a heartbeat - even if it meant my pretty expensive collection just vanished. While I do like guns, the benefits there would easily outweigh the drawbacks.\nBut, that is magical thinking, and useless to contemplate. Similar to some magical computer system that is somehow immune to abuse. There is no such thing.\nThere is nothing in the offered solution that has not been suggested or tried before. Once the obvious, fatal flaws and potentials for abuse in a solution are pointed out, the \"you won't be part of the solution\" accusations start.\nYou want to know why I won't be part of the solution?\nBecause there isn't one. Not the solution you want, anyway - where guns are regulated and controlled and removed from circulation somehow.\nAmerica has painted itself into a corner here. We have the following situation:\n\n400,000,000 guns in civilian hands now. Most in right wing hands. Nothing proposed here does anything about that.\nNot even the wildest of proposals by the Biden admin does anything about the existing weapons in civilian hands.\nThe proposed AR ban lets Bubba keep all his ARs and AKs and ammo, but you can't buy one, if you don't already have it. \nHere is the \"neat\" part. You'd be able to buy one from Bubba, if he wants to make a private sale. What kind of person do you think Bubba would be inclined to sell one of his assault rifles to?\nHeavy taxes on guns and ammo means only the rich can have them.\nLEOs and other enforcement bodies are heavily weighted to the right. The treatment of the BLM protestors clearly shows that they will not enforce laws without bias\nGun ownership is enshrined in the constitution, as well as the American psyche. It will take an amendment to do anything substantial. Zero chance of anything happening there.\n\nThere is no workable chance of doing anything about the massive firepower those on the radical right have hoarded. Nobody, on the left or right, is going to take them away.\nIf my MAGA neighbors get to stay heavily armed with assault weapons, then I want assaault weapons too.\nIt's MAD, on a small scale. But I don't see any better alternative.\nI bet Ukraine wishes they still had their nukes right about now.", ">\n\n\nThe \"abuse\" is a strawman. \n\nNope.\n\nAccessing gun records illegally and against hypothetical federal law has no value to anyone.\n\nThat is a silly statement. Knowledge of someone's gun ownership would have a lot of value to LEOs, unfriendly political foes, angry ex-spouses, etc.\nAnyone who can't see how having that information against one's opponents would be valuable can't be expected to see the inherent flaws with such a database.\n\nJesus, again with this. Please tell me where I mentioned taxes? \n\nYour original point, I believe, was that the plethora of gun laws was the gun nuts fault. You also accused me of not wanting to be part of the solution. My response is there IS no solution, and provided a list of reasons why gun control measures really cannot work effectively in this country.\nIf you want to limit the discussion to that hypothetical database that is magically immune to abuse and hacking, that is fine with me. You need to provide some technical details on how that will work, or it isn't going to gain a lot of traction.\nSaying \"the smart people will figure out the bugs\" is a copout. It is also wrong. \n\nGun people have been repeating dogma for so long that it's basically a programmed response at this point.\n\nThen offer a solution that is not equally tired. Magical databases immune from abuse aren't a solution, nor is the idea unique. \nIt is, however, nonexistent. If you actually work within systems like HIPPA and the NC court systems, you become much less convinced of the effectiveness of their IT security, especially when it is provided at the lowest quote, by the cheapest company willing to do government work.", ">\n\n\nBut it's not valuable because it's not actionable information.\n\nLet's say a husband and wife separate. The wife is afraid of her ex, and buys a handgun just in case.\nSomeone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web. The husband finds out she now has a tan Glock 19. He goes over to drop something off at her location. The encounter is uneventful. He now goes and files a report that she brandished and threatened him with a tan glock 19.\nActionable.\nAn LEO, like that racist sheriff I linked to way back in the thread, decides he wants to fuck over the black guy at the last city council meeting, who was complaining about police abuse. He checks the records, does not even need the dark web, finds out the guy he hates owns an AR15. Same operation as last time. Go out there for a nondescript reason, and oh my god he brandished an AR15\nTime for a swat visit, or fuck, just shoot him. We know there is a rifle in there somewhere.\nActionable.\nA left wing politician owns several firearms for personal defense, but publicly is very anti-gun, because that is how the wind blows in the Dem party. Someone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web - or, that info is provided from a sympathetic operative with appropriate access. The left wing politician's political opponents get that information, and then publish his hypocrisy for all to see. The left wing politician loses his next election.\nActionable.\n​\n\nwhat I did say was that hacked information is next to useless.\n\nThat is wrong, though. That info is easily acted on by bad people.\n​\n\nIt's literally part of every single product that has ever been developed since the beginning of time. There is not one product on the face of this planet that has been 100% perfect in the very first try.\n\nOne hack is all it would take, and all that information is available to anyone that wants to download it. \nAnd, I really do not get where the inherent trust of the govt officials that would be in charge of this comes from. You saw how norms and controls and precedents were completely ignored when the Trump admin was in power. There are no real checks and balances any more. If there is a national database of gun owners and their weapons, any technical controls and limits you put on it can be bypassed by a corrupt administration.", ">\n\n\nAs the challenges mount, it’s up to lawmakers to find a way around them, said Bob Hertzberg, a former California legislator whose bill could be heading to the Supreme Court.\nThis year, advocates hope to tax the gun industry and defy the Supreme Court\n\nThis is what we call tyrants folks. Politicans who actively try to bypass the Constitution, the highest law in the land, deserve to rot in prision. California is failing because they're attempting to deconstruct a God given right." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands.", ">\n\nSorry, my friend, but the GOP is making a dedicated push to make voting harder.\nThe explicit purpose is to disproportionately impact the voters who are least likely to vote for them.\nIf you wanna pretend like constitutional violations is only a thing for Democrats and 2A, I guess it's your prerogative to be detached from reality.", ">\n\n\nGun enthusiasts nuts do nothing but point out problems even though a problem identified is a problem half solved. \n\nCatchphrases like \"is a problem half solved\" don't do anything, really, other than make one feel better about an empty solution with no chance of success.\nIf there were some magic button to make every gun in the world disappear, and no new ones could ever be made, I would hit that button in a heartbeat - even if it meant my pretty expensive collection just vanished. While I do like guns, the benefits there would easily outweigh the drawbacks.\nBut, that is magical thinking, and useless to contemplate. Similar to some magical computer system that is somehow immune to abuse. There is no such thing.\nThere is nothing in the offered solution that has not been suggested or tried before. Once the obvious, fatal flaws and potentials for abuse in a solution are pointed out, the \"you won't be part of the solution\" accusations start.\nYou want to know why I won't be part of the solution?\nBecause there isn't one. Not the solution you want, anyway - where guns are regulated and controlled and removed from circulation somehow.\nAmerica has painted itself into a corner here. We have the following situation:\n\n400,000,000 guns in civilian hands now. Most in right wing hands. Nothing proposed here does anything about that.\nNot even the wildest of proposals by the Biden admin does anything about the existing weapons in civilian hands.\nThe proposed AR ban lets Bubba keep all his ARs and AKs and ammo, but you can't buy one, if you don't already have it. \nHere is the \"neat\" part. You'd be able to buy one from Bubba, if he wants to make a private sale. What kind of person do you think Bubba would be inclined to sell one of his assault rifles to?\nHeavy taxes on guns and ammo means only the rich can have them.\nLEOs and other enforcement bodies are heavily weighted to the right. The treatment of the BLM protestors clearly shows that they will not enforce laws without bias\nGun ownership is enshrined in the constitution, as well as the American psyche. It will take an amendment to do anything substantial. Zero chance of anything happening there.\n\nThere is no workable chance of doing anything about the massive firepower those on the radical right have hoarded. Nobody, on the left or right, is going to take them away.\nIf my MAGA neighbors get to stay heavily armed with assault weapons, then I want assaault weapons too.\nIt's MAD, on a small scale. But I don't see any better alternative.\nI bet Ukraine wishes they still had their nukes right about now.", ">\n\n\nThe \"abuse\" is a strawman. \n\nNope.\n\nAccessing gun records illegally and against hypothetical federal law has no value to anyone.\n\nThat is a silly statement. Knowledge of someone's gun ownership would have a lot of value to LEOs, unfriendly political foes, angry ex-spouses, etc.\nAnyone who can't see how having that information against one's opponents would be valuable can't be expected to see the inherent flaws with such a database.\n\nJesus, again with this. Please tell me where I mentioned taxes? \n\nYour original point, I believe, was that the plethora of gun laws was the gun nuts fault. You also accused me of not wanting to be part of the solution. My response is there IS no solution, and provided a list of reasons why gun control measures really cannot work effectively in this country.\nIf you want to limit the discussion to that hypothetical database that is magically immune to abuse and hacking, that is fine with me. You need to provide some technical details on how that will work, or it isn't going to gain a lot of traction.\nSaying \"the smart people will figure out the bugs\" is a copout. It is also wrong. \n\nGun people have been repeating dogma for so long that it's basically a programmed response at this point.\n\nThen offer a solution that is not equally tired. Magical databases immune from abuse aren't a solution, nor is the idea unique. \nIt is, however, nonexistent. If you actually work within systems like HIPPA and the NC court systems, you become much less convinced of the effectiveness of their IT security, especially when it is provided at the lowest quote, by the cheapest company willing to do government work.", ">\n\n\nBut it's not valuable because it's not actionable information.\n\nLet's say a husband and wife separate. The wife is afraid of her ex, and buys a handgun just in case.\nSomeone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web. The husband finds out she now has a tan Glock 19. He goes over to drop something off at her location. The encounter is uneventful. He now goes and files a report that she brandished and threatened him with a tan glock 19.\nActionable.\nAn LEO, like that racist sheriff I linked to way back in the thread, decides he wants to fuck over the black guy at the last city council meeting, who was complaining about police abuse. He checks the records, does not even need the dark web, finds out the guy he hates owns an AR15. Same operation as last time. Go out there for a nondescript reason, and oh my god he brandished an AR15\nTime for a swat visit, or fuck, just shoot him. We know there is a rifle in there somewhere.\nActionable.\nA left wing politician owns several firearms for personal defense, but publicly is very anti-gun, because that is how the wind blows in the Dem party. Someone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web - or, that info is provided from a sympathetic operative with appropriate access. The left wing politician's political opponents get that information, and then publish his hypocrisy for all to see. The left wing politician loses his next election.\nActionable.\n​\n\nwhat I did say was that hacked information is next to useless.\n\nThat is wrong, though. That info is easily acted on by bad people.\n​\n\nIt's literally part of every single product that has ever been developed since the beginning of time. There is not one product on the face of this planet that has been 100% perfect in the very first try.\n\nOne hack is all it would take, and all that information is available to anyone that wants to download it. \nAnd, I really do not get where the inherent trust of the govt officials that would be in charge of this comes from. You saw how norms and controls and precedents were completely ignored when the Trump admin was in power. There are no real checks and balances any more. If there is a national database of gun owners and their weapons, any technical controls and limits you put on it can be bypassed by a corrupt administration.", ">\n\n\nAs the challenges mount, it’s up to lawmakers to find a way around them, said Bob Hertzberg, a former California legislator whose bill could be heading to the Supreme Court.\nThis year, advocates hope to tax the gun industry and defy the Supreme Court\n\nThis is what we call tyrants folks. Politicans who actively try to bypass the Constitution, the highest law in the land, deserve to rot in prision. California is failing because they're attempting to deconstruct a God given right.", ">\n\nRepublicans don't know what California is actually like. \nThere's a reason that conservative media tries to convince them that California is some sort of post-apocalyptic wasteland, because if they knew what California was actually like, they would also know that everything Republicans say about democrat governance is bullshit. \nThere's a reason that long-term blue states have higher qualities of life than long-term red states." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands.", ">\n\nSorry, my friend, but the GOP is making a dedicated push to make voting harder.\nThe explicit purpose is to disproportionately impact the voters who are least likely to vote for them.\nIf you wanna pretend like constitutional violations is only a thing for Democrats and 2A, I guess it's your prerogative to be detached from reality.", ">\n\n\nGun enthusiasts nuts do nothing but point out problems even though a problem identified is a problem half solved. \n\nCatchphrases like \"is a problem half solved\" don't do anything, really, other than make one feel better about an empty solution with no chance of success.\nIf there were some magic button to make every gun in the world disappear, and no new ones could ever be made, I would hit that button in a heartbeat - even if it meant my pretty expensive collection just vanished. While I do like guns, the benefits there would easily outweigh the drawbacks.\nBut, that is magical thinking, and useless to contemplate. Similar to some magical computer system that is somehow immune to abuse. There is no such thing.\nThere is nothing in the offered solution that has not been suggested or tried before. Once the obvious, fatal flaws and potentials for abuse in a solution are pointed out, the \"you won't be part of the solution\" accusations start.\nYou want to know why I won't be part of the solution?\nBecause there isn't one. Not the solution you want, anyway - where guns are regulated and controlled and removed from circulation somehow.\nAmerica has painted itself into a corner here. We have the following situation:\n\n400,000,000 guns in civilian hands now. Most in right wing hands. Nothing proposed here does anything about that.\nNot even the wildest of proposals by the Biden admin does anything about the existing weapons in civilian hands.\nThe proposed AR ban lets Bubba keep all his ARs and AKs and ammo, but you can't buy one, if you don't already have it. \nHere is the \"neat\" part. You'd be able to buy one from Bubba, if he wants to make a private sale. What kind of person do you think Bubba would be inclined to sell one of his assault rifles to?\nHeavy taxes on guns and ammo means only the rich can have them.\nLEOs and other enforcement bodies are heavily weighted to the right. The treatment of the BLM protestors clearly shows that they will not enforce laws without bias\nGun ownership is enshrined in the constitution, as well as the American psyche. It will take an amendment to do anything substantial. Zero chance of anything happening there.\n\nThere is no workable chance of doing anything about the massive firepower those on the radical right have hoarded. Nobody, on the left or right, is going to take them away.\nIf my MAGA neighbors get to stay heavily armed with assault weapons, then I want assaault weapons too.\nIt's MAD, on a small scale. But I don't see any better alternative.\nI bet Ukraine wishes they still had their nukes right about now.", ">\n\n\nThe \"abuse\" is a strawman. \n\nNope.\n\nAccessing gun records illegally and against hypothetical federal law has no value to anyone.\n\nThat is a silly statement. Knowledge of someone's gun ownership would have a lot of value to LEOs, unfriendly political foes, angry ex-spouses, etc.\nAnyone who can't see how having that information against one's opponents would be valuable can't be expected to see the inherent flaws with such a database.\n\nJesus, again with this. Please tell me where I mentioned taxes? \n\nYour original point, I believe, was that the plethora of gun laws was the gun nuts fault. You also accused me of not wanting to be part of the solution. My response is there IS no solution, and provided a list of reasons why gun control measures really cannot work effectively in this country.\nIf you want to limit the discussion to that hypothetical database that is magically immune to abuse and hacking, that is fine with me. You need to provide some technical details on how that will work, or it isn't going to gain a lot of traction.\nSaying \"the smart people will figure out the bugs\" is a copout. It is also wrong. \n\nGun people have been repeating dogma for so long that it's basically a programmed response at this point.\n\nThen offer a solution that is not equally tired. Magical databases immune from abuse aren't a solution, nor is the idea unique. \nIt is, however, nonexistent. If you actually work within systems like HIPPA and the NC court systems, you become much less convinced of the effectiveness of their IT security, especially when it is provided at the lowest quote, by the cheapest company willing to do government work.", ">\n\n\nBut it's not valuable because it's not actionable information.\n\nLet's say a husband and wife separate. The wife is afraid of her ex, and buys a handgun just in case.\nSomeone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web. The husband finds out she now has a tan Glock 19. He goes over to drop something off at her location. The encounter is uneventful. He now goes and files a report that she brandished and threatened him with a tan glock 19.\nActionable.\nAn LEO, like that racist sheriff I linked to way back in the thread, decides he wants to fuck over the black guy at the last city council meeting, who was complaining about police abuse. He checks the records, does not even need the dark web, finds out the guy he hates owns an AR15. Same operation as last time. Go out there for a nondescript reason, and oh my god he brandished an AR15\nTime for a swat visit, or fuck, just shoot him. We know there is a rifle in there somewhere.\nActionable.\nA left wing politician owns several firearms for personal defense, but publicly is very anti-gun, because that is how the wind blows in the Dem party. Someone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web - or, that info is provided from a sympathetic operative with appropriate access. The left wing politician's political opponents get that information, and then publish his hypocrisy for all to see. The left wing politician loses his next election.\nActionable.\n​\n\nwhat I did say was that hacked information is next to useless.\n\nThat is wrong, though. That info is easily acted on by bad people.\n​\n\nIt's literally part of every single product that has ever been developed since the beginning of time. There is not one product on the face of this planet that has been 100% perfect in the very first try.\n\nOne hack is all it would take, and all that information is available to anyone that wants to download it. \nAnd, I really do not get where the inherent trust of the govt officials that would be in charge of this comes from. You saw how norms and controls and precedents were completely ignored when the Trump admin was in power. There are no real checks and balances any more. If there is a national database of gun owners and their weapons, any technical controls and limits you put on it can be bypassed by a corrupt administration.", ">\n\n\nAs the challenges mount, it’s up to lawmakers to find a way around them, said Bob Hertzberg, a former California legislator whose bill could be heading to the Supreme Court.\nThis year, advocates hope to tax the gun industry and defy the Supreme Court\n\nThis is what we call tyrants folks. Politicans who actively try to bypass the Constitution, the highest law in the land, deserve to rot in prision. California is failing because they're attempting to deconstruct a God given right.", ">\n\nRepublicans don't know what California is actually like. \nThere's a reason that conservative media tries to convince them that California is some sort of post-apocalyptic wasteland, because if they knew what California was actually like, they would also know that everything Republicans say about democrat governance is bullshit. \nThere's a reason that long-term blue states have higher qualities of life than long-term red states.", ">\n\nI've been to California. It's neat to visit, but to live? No way. I was stepping over homeless people in the streets, people smoking weed and crack on sidewalks, trash literally everywhere, homeless cities, bad traffic, high prices, etc... I'd say it's the other way. People who have lived in California their whole lives don't understand that most other states aren't so trashy to live in." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands.", ">\n\nSorry, my friend, but the GOP is making a dedicated push to make voting harder.\nThe explicit purpose is to disproportionately impact the voters who are least likely to vote for them.\nIf you wanna pretend like constitutional violations is only a thing for Democrats and 2A, I guess it's your prerogative to be detached from reality.", ">\n\n\nGun enthusiasts nuts do nothing but point out problems even though a problem identified is a problem half solved. \n\nCatchphrases like \"is a problem half solved\" don't do anything, really, other than make one feel better about an empty solution with no chance of success.\nIf there were some magic button to make every gun in the world disappear, and no new ones could ever be made, I would hit that button in a heartbeat - even if it meant my pretty expensive collection just vanished. While I do like guns, the benefits there would easily outweigh the drawbacks.\nBut, that is magical thinking, and useless to contemplate. Similar to some magical computer system that is somehow immune to abuse. There is no such thing.\nThere is nothing in the offered solution that has not been suggested or tried before. Once the obvious, fatal flaws and potentials for abuse in a solution are pointed out, the \"you won't be part of the solution\" accusations start.\nYou want to know why I won't be part of the solution?\nBecause there isn't one. Not the solution you want, anyway - where guns are regulated and controlled and removed from circulation somehow.\nAmerica has painted itself into a corner here. We have the following situation:\n\n400,000,000 guns in civilian hands now. Most in right wing hands. Nothing proposed here does anything about that.\nNot even the wildest of proposals by the Biden admin does anything about the existing weapons in civilian hands.\nThe proposed AR ban lets Bubba keep all his ARs and AKs and ammo, but you can't buy one, if you don't already have it. \nHere is the \"neat\" part. You'd be able to buy one from Bubba, if he wants to make a private sale. What kind of person do you think Bubba would be inclined to sell one of his assault rifles to?\nHeavy taxes on guns and ammo means only the rich can have them.\nLEOs and other enforcement bodies are heavily weighted to the right. The treatment of the BLM protestors clearly shows that they will not enforce laws without bias\nGun ownership is enshrined in the constitution, as well as the American psyche. It will take an amendment to do anything substantial. Zero chance of anything happening there.\n\nThere is no workable chance of doing anything about the massive firepower those on the radical right have hoarded. Nobody, on the left or right, is going to take them away.\nIf my MAGA neighbors get to stay heavily armed with assault weapons, then I want assaault weapons too.\nIt's MAD, on a small scale. But I don't see any better alternative.\nI bet Ukraine wishes they still had their nukes right about now.", ">\n\n\nThe \"abuse\" is a strawman. \n\nNope.\n\nAccessing gun records illegally and against hypothetical federal law has no value to anyone.\n\nThat is a silly statement. Knowledge of someone's gun ownership would have a lot of value to LEOs, unfriendly political foes, angry ex-spouses, etc.\nAnyone who can't see how having that information against one's opponents would be valuable can't be expected to see the inherent flaws with such a database.\n\nJesus, again with this. Please tell me where I mentioned taxes? \n\nYour original point, I believe, was that the plethora of gun laws was the gun nuts fault. You also accused me of not wanting to be part of the solution. My response is there IS no solution, and provided a list of reasons why gun control measures really cannot work effectively in this country.\nIf you want to limit the discussion to that hypothetical database that is magically immune to abuse and hacking, that is fine with me. You need to provide some technical details on how that will work, or it isn't going to gain a lot of traction.\nSaying \"the smart people will figure out the bugs\" is a copout. It is also wrong. \n\nGun people have been repeating dogma for so long that it's basically a programmed response at this point.\n\nThen offer a solution that is not equally tired. Magical databases immune from abuse aren't a solution, nor is the idea unique. \nIt is, however, nonexistent. If you actually work within systems like HIPPA and the NC court systems, you become much less convinced of the effectiveness of their IT security, especially when it is provided at the lowest quote, by the cheapest company willing to do government work.", ">\n\n\nBut it's not valuable because it's not actionable information.\n\nLet's say a husband and wife separate. The wife is afraid of her ex, and buys a handgun just in case.\nSomeone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web. The husband finds out she now has a tan Glock 19. He goes over to drop something off at her location. The encounter is uneventful. He now goes and files a report that she brandished and threatened him with a tan glock 19.\nActionable.\nAn LEO, like that racist sheriff I linked to way back in the thread, decides he wants to fuck over the black guy at the last city council meeting, who was complaining about police abuse. He checks the records, does not even need the dark web, finds out the guy he hates owns an AR15. Same operation as last time. Go out there for a nondescript reason, and oh my god he brandished an AR15\nTime for a swat visit, or fuck, just shoot him. We know there is a rifle in there somewhere.\nActionable.\nA left wing politician owns several firearms for personal defense, but publicly is very anti-gun, because that is how the wind blows in the Dem party. Someone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web - or, that info is provided from a sympathetic operative with appropriate access. The left wing politician's political opponents get that information, and then publish his hypocrisy for all to see. The left wing politician loses his next election.\nActionable.\n​\n\nwhat I did say was that hacked information is next to useless.\n\nThat is wrong, though. That info is easily acted on by bad people.\n​\n\nIt's literally part of every single product that has ever been developed since the beginning of time. There is not one product on the face of this planet that has been 100% perfect in the very first try.\n\nOne hack is all it would take, and all that information is available to anyone that wants to download it. \nAnd, I really do not get where the inherent trust of the govt officials that would be in charge of this comes from. You saw how norms and controls and precedents were completely ignored when the Trump admin was in power. There are no real checks and balances any more. If there is a national database of gun owners and their weapons, any technical controls and limits you put on it can be bypassed by a corrupt administration.", ">\n\n\nAs the challenges mount, it’s up to lawmakers to find a way around them, said Bob Hertzberg, a former California legislator whose bill could be heading to the Supreme Court.\nThis year, advocates hope to tax the gun industry and defy the Supreme Court\n\nThis is what we call tyrants folks. Politicans who actively try to bypass the Constitution, the highest law in the land, deserve to rot in prision. California is failing because they're attempting to deconstruct a God given right.", ">\n\nRepublicans don't know what California is actually like. \nThere's a reason that conservative media tries to convince them that California is some sort of post-apocalyptic wasteland, because if they knew what California was actually like, they would also know that everything Republicans say about democrat governance is bullshit. \nThere's a reason that long-term blue states have higher qualities of life than long-term red states.", ">\n\nI've been to California. It's neat to visit, but to live? No way. I was stepping over homeless people in the streets, people smoking weed and crack on sidewalks, trash literally everywhere, homeless cities, bad traffic, high prices, etc... I'd say it's the other way. People who have lived in California their whole lives don't understand that most other states aren't so trashy to live in.", ">\n\nYou've been to at best the downtown area of one of the major cities in California, a state that covers most of the west coast, and just based on that you want to pretend that the entire massive area of the state is entirely like that specific downtown stretch.\nYou're just proving me right. \nThis is like pretending that 80% of the east coast is like the shittiest area of Atlanta. \nYou didn't even think about that. You just chose to step in it. \nYou probably didn't even do the shit you're talking about. It's the same thing that every Republican ever makes up about California when people call them out about it.\nI live in California. I've lived here for 20 years. I lived in other states before this. The city that I live in ranks in the safest in the United States routinely. Wherever you live, it probably has worse crime, worse air quality and all sorts of other worse shit than where I live. \nYou don't know shit about California" ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands.", ">\n\nSorry, my friend, but the GOP is making a dedicated push to make voting harder.\nThe explicit purpose is to disproportionately impact the voters who are least likely to vote for them.\nIf you wanna pretend like constitutional violations is only a thing for Democrats and 2A, I guess it's your prerogative to be detached from reality.", ">\n\n\nGun enthusiasts nuts do nothing but point out problems even though a problem identified is a problem half solved. \n\nCatchphrases like \"is a problem half solved\" don't do anything, really, other than make one feel better about an empty solution with no chance of success.\nIf there were some magic button to make every gun in the world disappear, and no new ones could ever be made, I would hit that button in a heartbeat - even if it meant my pretty expensive collection just vanished. While I do like guns, the benefits there would easily outweigh the drawbacks.\nBut, that is magical thinking, and useless to contemplate. Similar to some magical computer system that is somehow immune to abuse. There is no such thing.\nThere is nothing in the offered solution that has not been suggested or tried before. Once the obvious, fatal flaws and potentials for abuse in a solution are pointed out, the \"you won't be part of the solution\" accusations start.\nYou want to know why I won't be part of the solution?\nBecause there isn't one. Not the solution you want, anyway - where guns are regulated and controlled and removed from circulation somehow.\nAmerica has painted itself into a corner here. We have the following situation:\n\n400,000,000 guns in civilian hands now. Most in right wing hands. Nothing proposed here does anything about that.\nNot even the wildest of proposals by the Biden admin does anything about the existing weapons in civilian hands.\nThe proposed AR ban lets Bubba keep all his ARs and AKs and ammo, but you can't buy one, if you don't already have it. \nHere is the \"neat\" part. You'd be able to buy one from Bubba, if he wants to make a private sale. What kind of person do you think Bubba would be inclined to sell one of his assault rifles to?\nHeavy taxes on guns and ammo means only the rich can have them.\nLEOs and other enforcement bodies are heavily weighted to the right. The treatment of the BLM protestors clearly shows that they will not enforce laws without bias\nGun ownership is enshrined in the constitution, as well as the American psyche. It will take an amendment to do anything substantial. Zero chance of anything happening there.\n\nThere is no workable chance of doing anything about the massive firepower those on the radical right have hoarded. Nobody, on the left or right, is going to take them away.\nIf my MAGA neighbors get to stay heavily armed with assault weapons, then I want assaault weapons too.\nIt's MAD, on a small scale. But I don't see any better alternative.\nI bet Ukraine wishes they still had their nukes right about now.", ">\n\n\nThe \"abuse\" is a strawman. \n\nNope.\n\nAccessing gun records illegally and against hypothetical federal law has no value to anyone.\n\nThat is a silly statement. Knowledge of someone's gun ownership would have a lot of value to LEOs, unfriendly political foes, angry ex-spouses, etc.\nAnyone who can't see how having that information against one's opponents would be valuable can't be expected to see the inherent flaws with such a database.\n\nJesus, again with this. Please tell me where I mentioned taxes? \n\nYour original point, I believe, was that the plethora of gun laws was the gun nuts fault. You also accused me of not wanting to be part of the solution. My response is there IS no solution, and provided a list of reasons why gun control measures really cannot work effectively in this country.\nIf you want to limit the discussion to that hypothetical database that is magically immune to abuse and hacking, that is fine with me. You need to provide some technical details on how that will work, or it isn't going to gain a lot of traction.\nSaying \"the smart people will figure out the bugs\" is a copout. It is also wrong. \n\nGun people have been repeating dogma for so long that it's basically a programmed response at this point.\n\nThen offer a solution that is not equally tired. Magical databases immune from abuse aren't a solution, nor is the idea unique. \nIt is, however, nonexistent. If you actually work within systems like HIPPA and the NC court systems, you become much less convinced of the effectiveness of their IT security, especially when it is provided at the lowest quote, by the cheapest company willing to do government work.", ">\n\n\nBut it's not valuable because it's not actionable information.\n\nLet's say a husband and wife separate. The wife is afraid of her ex, and buys a handgun just in case.\nSomeone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web. The husband finds out she now has a tan Glock 19. He goes over to drop something off at her location. The encounter is uneventful. He now goes and files a report that she brandished and threatened him with a tan glock 19.\nActionable.\nAn LEO, like that racist sheriff I linked to way back in the thread, decides he wants to fuck over the black guy at the last city council meeting, who was complaining about police abuse. He checks the records, does not even need the dark web, finds out the guy he hates owns an AR15. Same operation as last time. Go out there for a nondescript reason, and oh my god he brandished an AR15\nTime for a swat visit, or fuck, just shoot him. We know there is a rifle in there somewhere.\nActionable.\nA left wing politician owns several firearms for personal defense, but publicly is very anti-gun, because that is how the wind blows in the Dem party. Someone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web - or, that info is provided from a sympathetic operative with appropriate access. The left wing politician's political opponents get that information, and then publish his hypocrisy for all to see. The left wing politician loses his next election.\nActionable.\n​\n\nwhat I did say was that hacked information is next to useless.\n\nThat is wrong, though. That info is easily acted on by bad people.\n​\n\nIt's literally part of every single product that has ever been developed since the beginning of time. There is not one product on the face of this planet that has been 100% perfect in the very first try.\n\nOne hack is all it would take, and all that information is available to anyone that wants to download it. \nAnd, I really do not get where the inherent trust of the govt officials that would be in charge of this comes from. You saw how norms and controls and precedents were completely ignored when the Trump admin was in power. There are no real checks and balances any more. If there is a national database of gun owners and their weapons, any technical controls and limits you put on it can be bypassed by a corrupt administration.", ">\n\n\nAs the challenges mount, it’s up to lawmakers to find a way around them, said Bob Hertzberg, a former California legislator whose bill could be heading to the Supreme Court.\nThis year, advocates hope to tax the gun industry and defy the Supreme Court\n\nThis is what we call tyrants folks. Politicans who actively try to bypass the Constitution, the highest law in the land, deserve to rot in prision. California is failing because they're attempting to deconstruct a God given right.", ">\n\nRepublicans don't know what California is actually like. \nThere's a reason that conservative media tries to convince them that California is some sort of post-apocalyptic wasteland, because if they knew what California was actually like, they would also know that everything Republicans say about democrat governance is bullshit. \nThere's a reason that long-term blue states have higher qualities of life than long-term red states.", ">\n\nI've been to California. It's neat to visit, but to live? No way. I was stepping over homeless people in the streets, people smoking weed and crack on sidewalks, trash literally everywhere, homeless cities, bad traffic, high prices, etc... I'd say it's the other way. People who have lived in California their whole lives don't understand that most other states aren't so trashy to live in.", ">\n\nYou've been to at best the downtown area of one of the major cities in California, a state that covers most of the west coast, and just based on that you want to pretend that the entire massive area of the state is entirely like that specific downtown stretch.\nYou're just proving me right. \nThis is like pretending that 80% of the east coast is like the shittiest area of Atlanta. \nYou didn't even think about that. You just chose to step in it. \nYou probably didn't even do the shit you're talking about. It's the same thing that every Republican ever makes up about California when people call them out about it.\nI live in California. I've lived here for 20 years. I lived in other states before this. The city that I live in ranks in the safest in the United States routinely. Wherever you live, it probably has worse crime, worse air quality and all sorts of other worse shit than where I live. \nYou don't know shit about California", ">\n\nThey hate us cuz they ain’t us" ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands.", ">\n\nSorry, my friend, but the GOP is making a dedicated push to make voting harder.\nThe explicit purpose is to disproportionately impact the voters who are least likely to vote for them.\nIf you wanna pretend like constitutional violations is only a thing for Democrats and 2A, I guess it's your prerogative to be detached from reality.", ">\n\n\nGun enthusiasts nuts do nothing but point out problems even though a problem identified is a problem half solved. \n\nCatchphrases like \"is a problem half solved\" don't do anything, really, other than make one feel better about an empty solution with no chance of success.\nIf there were some magic button to make every gun in the world disappear, and no new ones could ever be made, I would hit that button in a heartbeat - even if it meant my pretty expensive collection just vanished. While I do like guns, the benefits there would easily outweigh the drawbacks.\nBut, that is magical thinking, and useless to contemplate. Similar to some magical computer system that is somehow immune to abuse. There is no such thing.\nThere is nothing in the offered solution that has not been suggested or tried before. Once the obvious, fatal flaws and potentials for abuse in a solution are pointed out, the \"you won't be part of the solution\" accusations start.\nYou want to know why I won't be part of the solution?\nBecause there isn't one. Not the solution you want, anyway - where guns are regulated and controlled and removed from circulation somehow.\nAmerica has painted itself into a corner here. We have the following situation:\n\n400,000,000 guns in civilian hands now. Most in right wing hands. Nothing proposed here does anything about that.\nNot even the wildest of proposals by the Biden admin does anything about the existing weapons in civilian hands.\nThe proposed AR ban lets Bubba keep all his ARs and AKs and ammo, but you can't buy one, if you don't already have it. \nHere is the \"neat\" part. You'd be able to buy one from Bubba, if he wants to make a private sale. What kind of person do you think Bubba would be inclined to sell one of his assault rifles to?\nHeavy taxes on guns and ammo means only the rich can have them.\nLEOs and other enforcement bodies are heavily weighted to the right. The treatment of the BLM protestors clearly shows that they will not enforce laws without bias\nGun ownership is enshrined in the constitution, as well as the American psyche. It will take an amendment to do anything substantial. Zero chance of anything happening there.\n\nThere is no workable chance of doing anything about the massive firepower those on the radical right have hoarded. Nobody, on the left or right, is going to take them away.\nIf my MAGA neighbors get to stay heavily armed with assault weapons, then I want assaault weapons too.\nIt's MAD, on a small scale. But I don't see any better alternative.\nI bet Ukraine wishes they still had their nukes right about now.", ">\n\n\nThe \"abuse\" is a strawman. \n\nNope.\n\nAccessing gun records illegally and against hypothetical federal law has no value to anyone.\n\nThat is a silly statement. Knowledge of someone's gun ownership would have a lot of value to LEOs, unfriendly political foes, angry ex-spouses, etc.\nAnyone who can't see how having that information against one's opponents would be valuable can't be expected to see the inherent flaws with such a database.\n\nJesus, again with this. Please tell me where I mentioned taxes? \n\nYour original point, I believe, was that the plethora of gun laws was the gun nuts fault. You also accused me of not wanting to be part of the solution. My response is there IS no solution, and provided a list of reasons why gun control measures really cannot work effectively in this country.\nIf you want to limit the discussion to that hypothetical database that is magically immune to abuse and hacking, that is fine with me. You need to provide some technical details on how that will work, or it isn't going to gain a lot of traction.\nSaying \"the smart people will figure out the bugs\" is a copout. It is also wrong. \n\nGun people have been repeating dogma for so long that it's basically a programmed response at this point.\n\nThen offer a solution that is not equally tired. Magical databases immune from abuse aren't a solution, nor is the idea unique. \nIt is, however, nonexistent. If you actually work within systems like HIPPA and the NC court systems, you become much less convinced of the effectiveness of their IT security, especially when it is provided at the lowest quote, by the cheapest company willing to do government work.", ">\n\n\nBut it's not valuable because it's not actionable information.\n\nLet's say a husband and wife separate. The wife is afraid of her ex, and buys a handgun just in case.\nSomeone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web. The husband finds out she now has a tan Glock 19. He goes over to drop something off at her location. The encounter is uneventful. He now goes and files a report that she brandished and threatened him with a tan glock 19.\nActionable.\nAn LEO, like that racist sheriff I linked to way back in the thread, decides he wants to fuck over the black guy at the last city council meeting, who was complaining about police abuse. He checks the records, does not even need the dark web, finds out the guy he hates owns an AR15. Same operation as last time. Go out there for a nondescript reason, and oh my god he brandished an AR15\nTime for a swat visit, or fuck, just shoot him. We know there is a rifle in there somewhere.\nActionable.\nA left wing politician owns several firearms for personal defense, but publicly is very anti-gun, because that is how the wind blows in the Dem party. Someone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web - or, that info is provided from a sympathetic operative with appropriate access. The left wing politician's political opponents get that information, and then publish his hypocrisy for all to see. The left wing politician loses his next election.\nActionable.\n​\n\nwhat I did say was that hacked information is next to useless.\n\nThat is wrong, though. That info is easily acted on by bad people.\n​\n\nIt's literally part of every single product that has ever been developed since the beginning of time. There is not one product on the face of this planet that has been 100% perfect in the very first try.\n\nOne hack is all it would take, and all that information is available to anyone that wants to download it. \nAnd, I really do not get where the inherent trust of the govt officials that would be in charge of this comes from. You saw how norms and controls and precedents were completely ignored when the Trump admin was in power. There are no real checks and balances any more. If there is a national database of gun owners and their weapons, any technical controls and limits you put on it can be bypassed by a corrupt administration.", ">\n\n\nAs the challenges mount, it’s up to lawmakers to find a way around them, said Bob Hertzberg, a former California legislator whose bill could be heading to the Supreme Court.\nThis year, advocates hope to tax the gun industry and defy the Supreme Court\n\nThis is what we call tyrants folks. Politicans who actively try to bypass the Constitution, the highest law in the land, deserve to rot in prision. California is failing because they're attempting to deconstruct a God given right.", ">\n\nRepublicans don't know what California is actually like. \nThere's a reason that conservative media tries to convince them that California is some sort of post-apocalyptic wasteland, because if they knew what California was actually like, they would also know that everything Republicans say about democrat governance is bullshit. \nThere's a reason that long-term blue states have higher qualities of life than long-term red states.", ">\n\nI've been to California. It's neat to visit, but to live? No way. I was stepping over homeless people in the streets, people smoking weed and crack on sidewalks, trash literally everywhere, homeless cities, bad traffic, high prices, etc... I'd say it's the other way. People who have lived in California their whole lives don't understand that most other states aren't so trashy to live in.", ">\n\nYou've been to at best the downtown area of one of the major cities in California, a state that covers most of the west coast, and just based on that you want to pretend that the entire massive area of the state is entirely like that specific downtown stretch.\nYou're just proving me right. \nThis is like pretending that 80% of the east coast is like the shittiest area of Atlanta. \nYou didn't even think about that. You just chose to step in it. \nYou probably didn't even do the shit you're talking about. It's the same thing that every Republican ever makes up about California when people call them out about it.\nI live in California. I've lived here for 20 years. I lived in other states before this. The city that I live in ranks in the safest in the United States routinely. Wherever you live, it probably has worse crime, worse air quality and all sorts of other worse shit than where I live. \nYou don't know shit about California", ">\n\nThey hate us cuz they ain’t us", ">\n\nGood." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands.", ">\n\nSorry, my friend, but the GOP is making a dedicated push to make voting harder.\nThe explicit purpose is to disproportionately impact the voters who are least likely to vote for them.\nIf you wanna pretend like constitutional violations is only a thing for Democrats and 2A, I guess it's your prerogative to be detached from reality.", ">\n\n\nGun enthusiasts nuts do nothing but point out problems even though a problem identified is a problem half solved. \n\nCatchphrases like \"is a problem half solved\" don't do anything, really, other than make one feel better about an empty solution with no chance of success.\nIf there were some magic button to make every gun in the world disappear, and no new ones could ever be made, I would hit that button in a heartbeat - even if it meant my pretty expensive collection just vanished. While I do like guns, the benefits there would easily outweigh the drawbacks.\nBut, that is magical thinking, and useless to contemplate. Similar to some magical computer system that is somehow immune to abuse. There is no such thing.\nThere is nothing in the offered solution that has not been suggested or tried before. Once the obvious, fatal flaws and potentials for abuse in a solution are pointed out, the \"you won't be part of the solution\" accusations start.\nYou want to know why I won't be part of the solution?\nBecause there isn't one. Not the solution you want, anyway - where guns are regulated and controlled and removed from circulation somehow.\nAmerica has painted itself into a corner here. We have the following situation:\n\n400,000,000 guns in civilian hands now. Most in right wing hands. Nothing proposed here does anything about that.\nNot even the wildest of proposals by the Biden admin does anything about the existing weapons in civilian hands.\nThe proposed AR ban lets Bubba keep all his ARs and AKs and ammo, but you can't buy one, if you don't already have it. \nHere is the \"neat\" part. You'd be able to buy one from Bubba, if he wants to make a private sale. What kind of person do you think Bubba would be inclined to sell one of his assault rifles to?\nHeavy taxes on guns and ammo means only the rich can have them.\nLEOs and other enforcement bodies are heavily weighted to the right. The treatment of the BLM protestors clearly shows that they will not enforce laws without bias\nGun ownership is enshrined in the constitution, as well as the American psyche. It will take an amendment to do anything substantial. Zero chance of anything happening there.\n\nThere is no workable chance of doing anything about the massive firepower those on the radical right have hoarded. Nobody, on the left or right, is going to take them away.\nIf my MAGA neighbors get to stay heavily armed with assault weapons, then I want assaault weapons too.\nIt's MAD, on a small scale. But I don't see any better alternative.\nI bet Ukraine wishes they still had their nukes right about now.", ">\n\n\nThe \"abuse\" is a strawman. \n\nNope.\n\nAccessing gun records illegally and against hypothetical federal law has no value to anyone.\n\nThat is a silly statement. Knowledge of someone's gun ownership would have a lot of value to LEOs, unfriendly political foes, angry ex-spouses, etc.\nAnyone who can't see how having that information against one's opponents would be valuable can't be expected to see the inherent flaws with such a database.\n\nJesus, again with this. Please tell me where I mentioned taxes? \n\nYour original point, I believe, was that the plethora of gun laws was the gun nuts fault. You also accused me of not wanting to be part of the solution. My response is there IS no solution, and provided a list of reasons why gun control measures really cannot work effectively in this country.\nIf you want to limit the discussion to that hypothetical database that is magically immune to abuse and hacking, that is fine with me. You need to provide some technical details on how that will work, or it isn't going to gain a lot of traction.\nSaying \"the smart people will figure out the bugs\" is a copout. It is also wrong. \n\nGun people have been repeating dogma for so long that it's basically a programmed response at this point.\n\nThen offer a solution that is not equally tired. Magical databases immune from abuse aren't a solution, nor is the idea unique. \nIt is, however, nonexistent. If you actually work within systems like HIPPA and the NC court systems, you become much less convinced of the effectiveness of their IT security, especially when it is provided at the lowest quote, by the cheapest company willing to do government work.", ">\n\n\nBut it's not valuable because it's not actionable information.\n\nLet's say a husband and wife separate. The wife is afraid of her ex, and buys a handgun just in case.\nSomeone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web. The husband finds out she now has a tan Glock 19. He goes over to drop something off at her location. The encounter is uneventful. He now goes and files a report that she brandished and threatened him with a tan glock 19.\nActionable.\nAn LEO, like that racist sheriff I linked to way back in the thread, decides he wants to fuck over the black guy at the last city council meeting, who was complaining about police abuse. He checks the records, does not even need the dark web, finds out the guy he hates owns an AR15. Same operation as last time. Go out there for a nondescript reason, and oh my god he brandished an AR15\nTime for a swat visit, or fuck, just shoot him. We know there is a rifle in there somewhere.\nActionable.\nA left wing politician owns several firearms for personal defense, but publicly is very anti-gun, because that is how the wind blows in the Dem party. Someone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web - or, that info is provided from a sympathetic operative with appropriate access. The left wing politician's political opponents get that information, and then publish his hypocrisy for all to see. The left wing politician loses his next election.\nActionable.\n​\n\nwhat I did say was that hacked information is next to useless.\n\nThat is wrong, though. That info is easily acted on by bad people.\n​\n\nIt's literally part of every single product that has ever been developed since the beginning of time. There is not one product on the face of this planet that has been 100% perfect in the very first try.\n\nOne hack is all it would take, and all that information is available to anyone that wants to download it. \nAnd, I really do not get where the inherent trust of the govt officials that would be in charge of this comes from. You saw how norms and controls and precedents were completely ignored when the Trump admin was in power. There are no real checks and balances any more. If there is a national database of gun owners and their weapons, any technical controls and limits you put on it can be bypassed by a corrupt administration.", ">\n\n\nAs the challenges mount, it’s up to lawmakers to find a way around them, said Bob Hertzberg, a former California legislator whose bill could be heading to the Supreme Court.\nThis year, advocates hope to tax the gun industry and defy the Supreme Court\n\nThis is what we call tyrants folks. Politicans who actively try to bypass the Constitution, the highest law in the land, deserve to rot in prision. California is failing because they're attempting to deconstruct a God given right.", ">\n\nRepublicans don't know what California is actually like. \nThere's a reason that conservative media tries to convince them that California is some sort of post-apocalyptic wasteland, because if they knew what California was actually like, they would also know that everything Republicans say about democrat governance is bullshit. \nThere's a reason that long-term blue states have higher qualities of life than long-term red states.", ">\n\nI've been to California. It's neat to visit, but to live? No way. I was stepping over homeless people in the streets, people smoking weed and crack on sidewalks, trash literally everywhere, homeless cities, bad traffic, high prices, etc... I'd say it's the other way. People who have lived in California their whole lives don't understand that most other states aren't so trashy to live in.", ">\n\nYou've been to at best the downtown area of one of the major cities in California, a state that covers most of the west coast, and just based on that you want to pretend that the entire massive area of the state is entirely like that specific downtown stretch.\nYou're just proving me right. \nThis is like pretending that 80% of the east coast is like the shittiest area of Atlanta. \nYou didn't even think about that. You just chose to step in it. \nYou probably didn't even do the shit you're talking about. It's the same thing that every Republican ever makes up about California when people call them out about it.\nI live in California. I've lived here for 20 years. I lived in other states before this. The city that I live in ranks in the safest in the United States routinely. Wherever you live, it probably has worse crime, worse air quality and all sorts of other worse shit than where I live. \nYou don't know shit about California", ">\n\nThey hate us cuz they ain’t us", ">\n\nGood.", ">\n\nThey are not trying to mitigate gun violence or deaths from guns, their agenda is to make a political statement at tax payers expense. They are obviously anti-gun, and if they could I am sure gun bans is what they would be trying to push. Due to political constraints that is not a possibility.\nThe courts will strike down the majority of these laws, and they will have achieved absolutely nothing except scoring political points with their base and wasting tax dollars.\nThe path to reducing gun violence looks radically different, you would focus on the root socioeconomic causes that lead to gun violence and how media reports on mass shootings and gun violence that lead to copycat and the prevalence of shootings, focusing on the correlation between reporting on the details of the shooters history, name, political ideology, method, type of weapons, number of victims, injuries, etc. and frequency of other shootings.\nYou would see a pragmatic response instead an emotional one if reducing gun violence was the ultimate goal. Its not. Using gun control as a wedge issue for short term political gain without any sight of long term consequences is a hallmark of Democratic strategy.\nCalifornia and Democratic states lean hard into gun control Republican states lean hard the other way...and due to the simple fact that most state legislatures in the U.S. being Republican controlled, a large percentage of the federal judiciary being Republican controlled, and the Supreme Court being Republican controlled....none of this turns for the political benefit of Democrats. Democrats will continue to lose more elections as a result. New York doubled down on unpopular concealed carry law and lost Democrats the House.\nIf you want to lose everything, I mean absolutely everything. Handing the country over to fascists indefinitely, have the Democratic party keep running on gun control." ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands.", ">\n\nSorry, my friend, but the GOP is making a dedicated push to make voting harder.\nThe explicit purpose is to disproportionately impact the voters who are least likely to vote for them.\nIf you wanna pretend like constitutional violations is only a thing for Democrats and 2A, I guess it's your prerogative to be detached from reality.", ">\n\n\nGun enthusiasts nuts do nothing but point out problems even though a problem identified is a problem half solved. \n\nCatchphrases like \"is a problem half solved\" don't do anything, really, other than make one feel better about an empty solution with no chance of success.\nIf there were some magic button to make every gun in the world disappear, and no new ones could ever be made, I would hit that button in a heartbeat - even if it meant my pretty expensive collection just vanished. While I do like guns, the benefits there would easily outweigh the drawbacks.\nBut, that is magical thinking, and useless to contemplate. Similar to some magical computer system that is somehow immune to abuse. There is no such thing.\nThere is nothing in the offered solution that has not been suggested or tried before. Once the obvious, fatal flaws and potentials for abuse in a solution are pointed out, the \"you won't be part of the solution\" accusations start.\nYou want to know why I won't be part of the solution?\nBecause there isn't one. Not the solution you want, anyway - where guns are regulated and controlled and removed from circulation somehow.\nAmerica has painted itself into a corner here. We have the following situation:\n\n400,000,000 guns in civilian hands now. Most in right wing hands. Nothing proposed here does anything about that.\nNot even the wildest of proposals by the Biden admin does anything about the existing weapons in civilian hands.\nThe proposed AR ban lets Bubba keep all his ARs and AKs and ammo, but you can't buy one, if you don't already have it. \nHere is the \"neat\" part. You'd be able to buy one from Bubba, if he wants to make a private sale. What kind of person do you think Bubba would be inclined to sell one of his assault rifles to?\nHeavy taxes on guns and ammo means only the rich can have them.\nLEOs and other enforcement bodies are heavily weighted to the right. The treatment of the BLM protestors clearly shows that they will not enforce laws without bias\nGun ownership is enshrined in the constitution, as well as the American psyche. It will take an amendment to do anything substantial. Zero chance of anything happening there.\n\nThere is no workable chance of doing anything about the massive firepower those on the radical right have hoarded. Nobody, on the left or right, is going to take them away.\nIf my MAGA neighbors get to stay heavily armed with assault weapons, then I want assaault weapons too.\nIt's MAD, on a small scale. But I don't see any better alternative.\nI bet Ukraine wishes they still had their nukes right about now.", ">\n\n\nThe \"abuse\" is a strawman. \n\nNope.\n\nAccessing gun records illegally and against hypothetical federal law has no value to anyone.\n\nThat is a silly statement. Knowledge of someone's gun ownership would have a lot of value to LEOs, unfriendly political foes, angry ex-spouses, etc.\nAnyone who can't see how having that information against one's opponents would be valuable can't be expected to see the inherent flaws with such a database.\n\nJesus, again with this. Please tell me where I mentioned taxes? \n\nYour original point, I believe, was that the plethora of gun laws was the gun nuts fault. You also accused me of not wanting to be part of the solution. My response is there IS no solution, and provided a list of reasons why gun control measures really cannot work effectively in this country.\nIf you want to limit the discussion to that hypothetical database that is magically immune to abuse and hacking, that is fine with me. You need to provide some technical details on how that will work, or it isn't going to gain a lot of traction.\nSaying \"the smart people will figure out the bugs\" is a copout. It is also wrong. \n\nGun people have been repeating dogma for so long that it's basically a programmed response at this point.\n\nThen offer a solution that is not equally tired. Magical databases immune from abuse aren't a solution, nor is the idea unique. \nIt is, however, nonexistent. If you actually work within systems like HIPPA and the NC court systems, you become much less convinced of the effectiveness of their IT security, especially when it is provided at the lowest quote, by the cheapest company willing to do government work.", ">\n\n\nBut it's not valuable because it's not actionable information.\n\nLet's say a husband and wife separate. The wife is afraid of her ex, and buys a handgun just in case.\nSomeone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web. The husband finds out she now has a tan Glock 19. He goes over to drop something off at her location. The encounter is uneventful. He now goes and files a report that she brandished and threatened him with a tan glock 19.\nActionable.\nAn LEO, like that racist sheriff I linked to way back in the thread, decides he wants to fuck over the black guy at the last city council meeting, who was complaining about police abuse. He checks the records, does not even need the dark web, finds out the guy he hates owns an AR15. Same operation as last time. Go out there for a nondescript reason, and oh my god he brandished an AR15\nTime for a swat visit, or fuck, just shoot him. We know there is a rifle in there somewhere.\nActionable.\nA left wing politician owns several firearms for personal defense, but publicly is very anti-gun, because that is how the wind blows in the Dem party. Someone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web - or, that info is provided from a sympathetic operative with appropriate access. The left wing politician's political opponents get that information, and then publish his hypocrisy for all to see. The left wing politician loses his next election.\nActionable.\n​\n\nwhat I did say was that hacked information is next to useless.\n\nThat is wrong, though. That info is easily acted on by bad people.\n​\n\nIt's literally part of every single product that has ever been developed since the beginning of time. There is not one product on the face of this planet that has been 100% perfect in the very first try.\n\nOne hack is all it would take, and all that information is available to anyone that wants to download it. \nAnd, I really do not get where the inherent trust of the govt officials that would be in charge of this comes from. You saw how norms and controls and precedents were completely ignored when the Trump admin was in power. There are no real checks and balances any more. If there is a national database of gun owners and their weapons, any technical controls and limits you put on it can be bypassed by a corrupt administration.", ">\n\n\nAs the challenges mount, it’s up to lawmakers to find a way around them, said Bob Hertzberg, a former California legislator whose bill could be heading to the Supreme Court.\nThis year, advocates hope to tax the gun industry and defy the Supreme Court\n\nThis is what we call tyrants folks. Politicans who actively try to bypass the Constitution, the highest law in the land, deserve to rot in prision. California is failing because they're attempting to deconstruct a God given right.", ">\n\nRepublicans don't know what California is actually like. \nThere's a reason that conservative media tries to convince them that California is some sort of post-apocalyptic wasteland, because if they knew what California was actually like, they would also know that everything Republicans say about democrat governance is bullshit. \nThere's a reason that long-term blue states have higher qualities of life than long-term red states.", ">\n\nI've been to California. It's neat to visit, but to live? No way. I was stepping over homeless people in the streets, people smoking weed and crack on sidewalks, trash literally everywhere, homeless cities, bad traffic, high prices, etc... I'd say it's the other way. People who have lived in California their whole lives don't understand that most other states aren't so trashy to live in.", ">\n\nYou've been to at best the downtown area of one of the major cities in California, a state that covers most of the west coast, and just based on that you want to pretend that the entire massive area of the state is entirely like that specific downtown stretch.\nYou're just proving me right. \nThis is like pretending that 80% of the east coast is like the shittiest area of Atlanta. \nYou didn't even think about that. You just chose to step in it. \nYou probably didn't even do the shit you're talking about. It's the same thing that every Republican ever makes up about California when people call them out about it.\nI live in California. I've lived here for 20 years. I lived in other states before this. The city that I live in ranks in the safest in the United States routinely. Wherever you live, it probably has worse crime, worse air quality and all sorts of other worse shit than where I live. \nYou don't know shit about California", ">\n\nThey hate us cuz they ain’t us", ">\n\nGood.", ">\n\nThey are not trying to mitigate gun violence or deaths from guns, their agenda is to make a political statement at tax payers expense. They are obviously anti-gun, and if they could I am sure gun bans is what they would be trying to push. Due to political constraints that is not a possibility.\nThe courts will strike down the majority of these laws, and they will have achieved absolutely nothing except scoring political points with their base and wasting tax dollars.\nThe path to reducing gun violence looks radically different, you would focus on the root socioeconomic causes that lead to gun violence and how media reports on mass shootings and gun violence that lead to copycat and the prevalence of shootings, focusing on the correlation between reporting on the details of the shooters history, name, political ideology, method, type of weapons, number of victims, injuries, etc. and frequency of other shootings.\nYou would see a pragmatic response instead an emotional one if reducing gun violence was the ultimate goal. Its not. Using gun control as a wedge issue for short term political gain without any sight of long term consequences is a hallmark of Democratic strategy.\nCalifornia and Democratic states lean hard into gun control Republican states lean hard the other way...and due to the simple fact that most state legislatures in the U.S. being Republican controlled, a large percentage of the federal judiciary being Republican controlled, and the Supreme Court being Republican controlled....none of this turns for the political benefit of Democrats. Democrats will continue to lose more elections as a result. New York doubled down on unpopular concealed carry law and lost Democrats the House.\nIf you want to lose everything, I mean absolutely everything. Handing the country over to fascists indefinitely, have the Democratic party keep running on gun control.", ">\n\nSaving lives trumps any political calculations. For that reason alone it’s worth pursuing any and all gun control approaches" ]

[ "Lots of right wingers here are complaining about California's gun laws, yet those idiots don't realize that most of those anti-gun laws were passed by the Reagan administration. The Republicans did so because black people were getting armed for their own protection from bigots like Republicans and their neo-nazi/kkk allies. Republicans wanted black people to be defenseless against the attacks from Republicans.", ">\n\nNot that gun laws are not racist and classiest, but California really got enthusiastic about gun control when somebody took a shot at Reagan. Which kinda says a lot about the moorings of Republicans. A country of men, not of laws.", ">\n\nAre you mixing up the Mulford Act with the Brady Bill?", ">\n\nYou know, approximately 100% of neo-liberals would absolutely agree with the Mulford Act if they knew what it was. Good on Reagan, a man who knew excessive zeal for civil rights when he saw it, eh? Scary blacks with scary loaded guns insisting on exercising their rights under the law. Threats are not free speech! Except if you are a cop!", ">\n\nIt was a bi-partisan bill\n\nproposed by a Republican \nsponsored by both Republicans and Democrats\nPassed through Democrat majority senate and assembly\nsigned by a Republican governor\n\nThe one thing both parties could go along with in the 60s was racism.\nThe Brady Bill was the response to the shot at Reagan though.", ">\n\nThis is what people get really wrong about the idea of the parties changing places after the Civil Rights Act. Both parties were wildly racist before it, and only the Democrats changed positions. The real shift was the voters in the South that switched party allegiance because racism was more important to them than any other issue.", ">\n\nGood", ">\n\n\"We will continue to flout the law and cultivate lots of court precedents which are only going to push us further back, costing taxpayers tens of millions and making no difference in violent crime. So vote for us!\"\nThe Supreme Court in Heller explicitly names six categories of gun restrictions which are still presumptively legal, and 2022's Bruen is careful not to contradict Heller.\nAmong these permissible restrictions are those on sensitive places (but states may not play games by designating entire regions as sensitive, like Times Square), weapons which are unusually dangerous, gun owners who are felons or mentally defective, prohibitions against concealed weapons, and conditions on the conditions and requirements for commercial sales of arms.\nYou can do a lot with that. So do it. Virtually all these innovative novel experiments would make no significant difference if they were constitutional, and they aren't. The Second Amendment is here to stay, it is not some historical anachronism, self defense by common means is a protected constitutional liberty.\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead. It is political theater and California voters are getting played.", ">\n\n\nThere are many legal ways to address the root causes of violent crime, and all the effort and capital spend on futile gun control campaigns could be spent accomplishing those instead.\n\nThere certainly are, but those things take work. It's hard to explain them in a 5-second soundbite, and I have golf at 4:00, so let's just say we'll ban some guns and call it a day.\nThe problem is, proposing gun control has become an easy out to gloss over the underlying issues at work.", ">\n\nWell said and thank you. Somewhere we forgot that doing something about crime reduction is completely different from talking about crime reduction. The real heavy lifting requires actual engagement with actual people. This is an incisive, empirical example.\nThis is what we need to get back to, and go forward with. Real solutions do not begin and end with Reddit posts, or liking and sharing things on Facebook, or watching Rachael Maddow.", ">\n\nSpeaking as a left-wing Canadian who owns guns...\nIt just seems that California wishes that your country's 2A protections didn't exist, and has simply decided to pretend that they don't. This is doubly so when one considers that they're fighting hard to create and uphold laws whose main effect is to deny people access to a right for being too poor, too black, or too unconnected to cop friends.", ">\n\nPlus Canada right now is going through massive disarming of its legal citizens. /r/politics is too enclosed in a bubble for you to show them reality.\nCalifornia is seen in the US as the most extreme state with the most unconstitutional laws. This doesn't stop at them trying to remove a constitutional right.", ">\n\nI mean, I think you're half right.\nYes, Canada is passing some viciously pandering gun laws.\nFor the USA, California is thee most willing to trample the constitution when it comes to guns. The red states are pretty universally awful when it comes to voting rights, asset forfeiture, abortion access, and a slew of rights that they love to trample to whatever extent they're able.\nCalling out California for violating its' citizens constitutional rights doesn't somehow exculpate the wider viciousness with which conservative states treat your country's civil liberties.", ">\n\nUm, voting rights and asset forfeiture are not any worse in other states. And abortion isn't a Constitutional right.\nMy point stands.", ">\n\nSorry, my friend, but the GOP is making a dedicated push to make voting harder.\nThe explicit purpose is to disproportionately impact the voters who are least likely to vote for them.\nIf you wanna pretend like constitutional violations is only a thing for Democrats and 2A, I guess it's your prerogative to be detached from reality.", ">\n\n\nGun enthusiasts nuts do nothing but point out problems even though a problem identified is a problem half solved. \n\nCatchphrases like \"is a problem half solved\" don't do anything, really, other than make one feel better about an empty solution with no chance of success.\nIf there were some magic button to make every gun in the world disappear, and no new ones could ever be made, I would hit that button in a heartbeat - even if it meant my pretty expensive collection just vanished. While I do like guns, the benefits there would easily outweigh the drawbacks.\nBut, that is magical thinking, and useless to contemplate. Similar to some magical computer system that is somehow immune to abuse. There is no such thing.\nThere is nothing in the offered solution that has not been suggested or tried before. Once the obvious, fatal flaws and potentials for abuse in a solution are pointed out, the \"you won't be part of the solution\" accusations start.\nYou want to know why I won't be part of the solution?\nBecause there isn't one. Not the solution you want, anyway - where guns are regulated and controlled and removed from circulation somehow.\nAmerica has painted itself into a corner here. We have the following situation:\n\n400,000,000 guns in civilian hands now. Most in right wing hands. Nothing proposed here does anything about that.\nNot even the wildest of proposals by the Biden admin does anything about the existing weapons in civilian hands.\nThe proposed AR ban lets Bubba keep all his ARs and AKs and ammo, but you can't buy one, if you don't already have it. \nHere is the \"neat\" part. You'd be able to buy one from Bubba, if he wants to make a private sale. What kind of person do you think Bubba would be inclined to sell one of his assault rifles to?\nHeavy taxes on guns and ammo means only the rich can have them.\nLEOs and other enforcement bodies are heavily weighted to the right. The treatment of the BLM protestors clearly shows that they will not enforce laws without bias\nGun ownership is enshrined in the constitution, as well as the American psyche. It will take an amendment to do anything substantial. Zero chance of anything happening there.\n\nThere is no workable chance of doing anything about the massive firepower those on the radical right have hoarded. Nobody, on the left or right, is going to take them away.\nIf my MAGA neighbors get to stay heavily armed with assault weapons, then I want assaault weapons too.\nIt's MAD, on a small scale. But I don't see any better alternative.\nI bet Ukraine wishes they still had their nukes right about now.", ">\n\n\nThe \"abuse\" is a strawman. \n\nNope.\n\nAccessing gun records illegally and against hypothetical federal law has no value to anyone.\n\nThat is a silly statement. Knowledge of someone's gun ownership would have a lot of value to LEOs, unfriendly political foes, angry ex-spouses, etc.\nAnyone who can't see how having that information against one's opponents would be valuable can't be expected to see the inherent flaws with such a database.\n\nJesus, again with this. Please tell me where I mentioned taxes? \n\nYour original point, I believe, was that the plethora of gun laws was the gun nuts fault. You also accused me of not wanting to be part of the solution. My response is there IS no solution, and provided a list of reasons why gun control measures really cannot work effectively in this country.\nIf you want to limit the discussion to that hypothetical database that is magically immune to abuse and hacking, that is fine with me. You need to provide some technical details on how that will work, or it isn't going to gain a lot of traction.\nSaying \"the smart people will figure out the bugs\" is a copout. It is also wrong. \n\nGun people have been repeating dogma for so long that it's basically a programmed response at this point.\n\nThen offer a solution that is not equally tired. Magical databases immune from abuse aren't a solution, nor is the idea unique. \nIt is, however, nonexistent. If you actually work within systems like HIPPA and the NC court systems, you become much less convinced of the effectiveness of their IT security, especially when it is provided at the lowest quote, by the cheapest company willing to do government work.", ">\n\n\nBut it's not valuable because it's not actionable information.\n\nLet's say a husband and wife separate. The wife is afraid of her ex, and buys a handgun just in case.\nSomeone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web. The husband finds out she now has a tan Glock 19. He goes over to drop something off at her location. The encounter is uneventful. He now goes and files a report that she brandished and threatened him with a tan glock 19.\nActionable.\nAn LEO, like that racist sheriff I linked to way back in the thread, decides he wants to fuck over the black guy at the last city council meeting, who was complaining about police abuse. He checks the records, does not even need the dark web, finds out the guy he hates owns an AR15. Same operation as last time. Go out there for a nondescript reason, and oh my god he brandished an AR15\nTime for a swat visit, or fuck, just shoot him. We know there is a rifle in there somewhere.\nActionable.\nA left wing politician owns several firearms for personal defense, but publicly is very anti-gun, because that is how the wind blows in the Dem party. Someone makes that gun ownership database available on the dark web - or, that info is provided from a sympathetic operative with appropriate access. The left wing politician's political opponents get that information, and then publish his hypocrisy for all to see. The left wing politician loses his next election.\nActionable.\n​\n\nwhat I did say was that hacked information is next to useless.\n\nThat is wrong, though. That info is easily acted on by bad people.\n​\n\nIt's literally part of every single product that has ever been developed since the beginning of time. There is not one product on the face of this planet that has been 100% perfect in the very first try.\n\nOne hack is all it would take, and all that information is available to anyone that wants to download it. \nAnd, I really do not get where the inherent trust of the govt officials that would be in charge of this comes from. You saw how norms and controls and precedents were completely ignored when the Trump admin was in power. There are no real checks and balances any more. If there is a national database of gun owners and their weapons, any technical controls and limits you put on it can be bypassed by a corrupt administration.", ">\n\n\nAs the challenges mount, it’s up to lawmakers to find a way around them, said Bob Hertzberg, a former California legislator whose bill could be heading to the Supreme Court.\nThis year, advocates hope to tax the gun industry and defy the Supreme Court\n\nThis is what we call tyrants folks. Politicans who actively try to bypass the Constitution, the highest law in the land, deserve to rot in prision. California is failing because they're attempting to deconstruct a God given right.", ">\n\nRepublicans don't know what California is actually like. \nThere's a reason that conservative media tries to convince them that California is some sort of post-apocalyptic wasteland, because if they knew what California was actually like, they would also know that everything Republicans say about democrat governance is bullshit. \nThere's a reason that long-term blue states have higher qualities of life than long-term red states.", ">\n\nI've been to California. It's neat to visit, but to live? No way. I was stepping over homeless people in the streets, people smoking weed and crack on sidewalks, trash literally everywhere, homeless cities, bad traffic, high prices, etc... I'd say it's the other way. People who have lived in California their whole lives don't understand that most other states aren't so trashy to live in.", ">\n\nYou've been to at best the downtown area of one of the major cities in California, a state that covers most of the west coast, and just based on that you want to pretend that the entire massive area of the state is entirely like that specific downtown stretch.\nYou're just proving me right. \nThis is like pretending that 80% of the east coast is like the shittiest area of Atlanta. \nYou didn't even think about that. You just chose to step in it. \nYou probably didn't even do the shit you're talking about. It's the same thing that every Republican ever makes up about California when people call them out about it.\nI live in California. I've lived here for 20 years. I lived in other states before this. The city that I live in ranks in the safest in the United States routinely. Wherever you live, it probably has worse crime, worse air quality and all sorts of other worse shit than where I live. \nYou don't know shit about California", ">\n\nThey hate us cuz they ain’t us", ">\n\nGood.", ">\n\nThey are not trying to mitigate gun violence or deaths from guns, their agenda is to make a political statement at tax payers expense. They are obviously anti-gun, and if they could I am sure gun bans is what they would be trying to push. Due to political constraints that is not a possibility.\nThe courts will strike down the majority of these laws, and they will have achieved absolutely nothing except scoring political points with their base and wasting tax dollars.\nThe path to reducing gun violence looks radically different, you would focus on the root socioeconomic causes that lead to gun violence and how media reports on mass shootings and gun violence that lead to copycat and the prevalence of shootings, focusing on the correlation between reporting on the details of the shooters history, name, political ideology, method, type of weapons, number of victims, injuries, etc. and frequency of other shootings.\nYou would see a pragmatic response instead an emotional one if reducing gun violence was the ultimate goal. Its not. Using gun control as a wedge issue for short term political gain without any sight of long term consequences is a hallmark of Democratic strategy.\nCalifornia and Democratic states lean hard into gun control Republican states lean hard the other way...and due to the simple fact that most state legislatures in the U.S. being Republican controlled, a large percentage of the federal judiciary being Republican controlled, and the Supreme Court being Republican controlled....none of this turns for the political benefit of Democrats. Democrats will continue to lose more elections as a result. New York doubled down on unpopular concealed carry law and lost Democrats the House.\nIf you want to lose everything, I mean absolutely everything. Handing the country over to fascists indefinitely, have the Democratic party keep running on gun control.", ">\n\nSaving lives trumps any political calculations. For that reason alone it’s worth pursuing any and all gun control approaches", ">\n\nYou dont get it, you dont save lives. The gun control legislation fundamentally does not work as it causes panic buying of gun and ammunition sales and does absolutely nothing to address the issues that causes gun violence.\nOn top of that, with the current state of politics, most strict gun control legislation will be overturned by the courts.\nThere is no outcome where passing strict gun control measures works towards the political benefit or the safety of residents. There needs to be smarter strategy employed focusing on this issue and there isnt. People are stuck using it as a wedge issue and only as a wedge issue." ]

[]

[ "Dave towers646 is a news bot that feeds us our daily spread" ]

[ "Dave towers646 is a news bot that feeds us our daily spread", ">\n\nA bot that can’t be reported for being a bot." ]

[ "Dave towers646 is a news bot that feeds us our daily spread", ">\n\nA bot that can’t be reported for being a bot.", ">\n\nwhy not? serious question." ]

[ "Dave towers646 is a news bot that feeds us our daily spread", ">\n\nA bot that can’t be reported for being a bot.", ">\n\nwhy not? serious question.", ">\n\nSomething with the user side of reddit changed a few months ago that quelled the ability to report or block ads. While I can’t prove anything, it seems like they also nixed the option to block and report a ton of accounts. \nYou can still report the comments from the bots, but not the account. Frustrating." ]

[ "Dave towers646 is a news bot that feeds us our daily spread", ">\n\nA bot that can’t be reported for being a bot.", ">\n\nwhy not? serious question.", ">\n\nSomething with the user side of reddit changed a few months ago that quelled the ability to report or block ads. While I can’t prove anything, it seems like they also nixed the option to block and report a ton of accounts. \nYou can still report the comments from the bots, but not the account. Frustrating.", ">\n\nWith each person Iran cruelly executes in an attempt to quash dissent and bypass legitimate due process, they fuel further dissent and delegitimize their hold on authority. \nI have deep respect for the risks and courage so many Iranians have shown over the past few months and years as they attempt to reclaim their country with a hope that they too will be able to a enjoy a future free from autocracy, theocracy, and authoritarianism." ]

[]

[ "Punish Trump for inspiring it. \nCan we extradite to Brazil?" ]

[ "Punish Trump for inspiring it. \nCan we extradite to Brazil?", ">\n\nAmerica and Brazil do have such a treaty." ]

[]

[ "This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.\nRemember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not \"thoughts had in the shower!\"\n(For an explanation of what a \"showerthought\" is, please read this page.)\nRule-breaking posts may result in bans." ]

[ "This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.\nRemember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not \"thoughts had in the shower!\"\n(For an explanation of what a \"showerthought\" is, please read this page.)\nRule-breaking posts may result in bans.", ">\n\nPsst, I'm actually not." ]

[]

[ "“For the last time, I can’t give you Epstein’s island!”" ]

[ "“For the last time, I can’t give you Epstein’s island!”", ">\n\nI wish a competent lip reader would translate what was said" ]

[ "“For the last time, I can’t give you Epstein’s island!”", ">\n\nI wish a competent lip reader would translate what was said", ">\n\nJomboy on YouTube, notorious for lip reading players/managers/umpires in baseball" ]

[ "“For the last time, I can’t give you Epstein’s island!”", ">\n\nI wish a competent lip reader would translate what was said", ">\n\nJomboy on YouTube, notorious for lip reading players/managers/umpires in baseball", ">\n\nI've never wanted anything more in my life" ]

[ "“For the last time, I can’t give you Epstein’s island!”", ">\n\nI wish a competent lip reader would translate what was said", ">\n\nJomboy on YouTube, notorious for lip reading players/managers/umpires in baseball", ">\n\nI've never wanted anything more in my life", ">\n\nNot quite this exact interaction, but there’s one of AOC early on in this clusterfuck." ]

[ "“For the last time, I can’t give you Epstein’s island!”", ">\n\nI wish a competent lip reader would translate what was said", ">\n\nJomboy on YouTube, notorious for lip reading players/managers/umpires in baseball", ">\n\nI've never wanted anything more in my life", ">\n\nNot quite this exact interaction, but there’s one of AOC early on in this clusterfuck.", ">\n\nBad lip reading on YouTube is really good but pretty inaccurate" ]

[ "“For the last time, I can’t give you Epstein’s island!”", ">\n\nI wish a competent lip reader would translate what was said", ">\n\nJomboy on YouTube, notorious for lip reading players/managers/umpires in baseball", ">\n\nI've never wanted anything more in my life", ">\n\nNot quite this exact interaction, but there’s one of AOC early on in this clusterfuck.", ">\n\nBad lip reading on YouTube is really good but pretty inaccurate", ">\n\nIt’s…it’s supposed to be. That’s the concept." ]

[ "“For the last time, I can’t give you Epstein’s island!”", ">\n\nI wish a competent lip reader would translate what was said", ">\n\nJomboy on YouTube, notorious for lip reading players/managers/umpires in baseball", ">\n\nI've never wanted anything more in my life", ">\n\nNot quite this exact interaction, but there’s one of AOC early on in this clusterfuck.", ">\n\nBad lip reading on YouTube is really good but pretty inaccurate", ">\n\nIt’s…it’s supposed to be. That’s the concept.", ">\n\nYeah just thought I'd let people know if they're looking for accuracy" ]

[ "“For the last time, I can’t give you Epstein’s island!”", ">\n\nI wish a competent lip reader would translate what was said", ">\n\nJomboy on YouTube, notorious for lip reading players/managers/umpires in baseball", ">\n\nI've never wanted anything more in my life", ">\n\nNot quite this exact interaction, but there’s one of AOC early on in this clusterfuck.", ">\n\nBad lip reading on YouTube is really good but pretty inaccurate", ">\n\nIt’s…it’s supposed to be. That’s the concept.", ">\n\nYeah just thought I'd let people know if they're looking for accuracy", ">\n\nBut the name specifically says “bad lip reading,” so…" ]

[ "“For the last time, I can’t give you Epstein’s island!”", ">\n\nI wish a competent lip reader would translate what was said", ">\n\nJomboy on YouTube, notorious for lip reading players/managers/umpires in baseball", ">\n\nI've never wanted anything more in my life", ">\n\nNot quite this exact interaction, but there’s one of AOC early on in this clusterfuck.", ">\n\nBad lip reading on YouTube is really good but pretty inaccurate", ">\n\nIt’s…it’s supposed to be. That’s the concept.", ">\n\nYeah just thought I'd let people know if they're looking for accuracy", ">\n\nBut the name specifically says “bad lip reading,” so…", ">\n\nPeople might think it means lip reading people with cold sores" ]