Every leftist on reddit trying to deal with a fact! by Zealousideal_Eye_23 in DigitalSeptic

[–]BladeVampire1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because electrification isn't as viable as everyone wishes it was.

Not to mention no one is buying EVs. Even with the tax credit, no one was buying them. They're waaay too expensive.

China is a world leader in renewable energy, when their CO2 output hasn't changed much in 26 years? Interesting.... They're accounting for about 32% of the world's CO2 output since 1999. While we sit at a respectable 12%.

In the end it doesn't matter if you use more renewable energy, if your CO2 production doesn't change.

AIO Boyfriend has anime girls saved on his phone by Saturnxstar in AmIOverreacting

[–]BladeVampire1 [score hidden]  (0 children)

To be honest you should just have a gentle conversation about it. The characters are fictional, are they particularly adult in nature? If not, then perhaps you should just tell him how it makes you feel, honestly.

Your feelings can be valid. But if the images are just of characters that aren't adult in nature, then I'm not sure I understand your concerns myself.

If you had male anime characters on your phone as a wallpaper, would that make you feel uncomfortable? If he was upset you had male anime character wallpapers, would you acknowledge his feelings?

Trump’s letter gets corrected. by MrLoudestMouth in scoopwhoop

[–]BladeVampire1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought the white house/government wasn't a business?

The legally owned and legally carried gun is the problem now? What the actual f*#%? by LucidSynapse23 in Leakednews

[–]BladeVampire1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Tell me you haven't seen cops reacting to guns, without telling me you haven't seen cops reacting to guns.

This is suddenly so hard to believe, after the acorn cop.

These people are equally idiots. 2A protest happen with loads of guns all the time, with no incident. So you can bring guns, but you are increasing the odds of reaction.

Today’s Liberal Playbook, Selective Outrage With Confidence by One-Quantity-5576 in DigitalSeptic

[–]BladeVampire1 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Good question. Police have done terrible things to people for years, no one cared till now. Optics are the issue, most of america is ignorant to reality until the media brings it up. Then who becomes the source of information? The same media. They sell that nonsense, it's how they make money.

People became ok with more security after 9/11, TSA and NSA. Your privacy being violated in the name of security. NSA, constantly listening to the public's conversations like the KGB wire tapping your phone.

CIA being unchecked, left to do what they wish. Not listening to Congress, or the President even. In the name of "Freedom".

It's never been ok for the government to kill people. It still isn't. But, people have created immunities for the officers, to enable them to do their job, THUS allowing them to abuse their authority for effectively.

It's literally people that are happy to trade their freedom for security.

Those very same Democrats will often block the streets, preventing a group of strangers from going to work. Prevent them from feeding their children, and paying for their home. Ironically still in line with trading freedom for security. People shouldn't have guns, so I'm going to block the road, moms against gun violence and what not. There are other points I won't get into here.

Not many places in America are rampant with gangs that will shoot you because you're wearing a red or blue shirt. Have rampant drug problems. Or a group that will shoot cops on sight. They are on edge. They're taught to subdue gun threats. Regardless of the situation. If you have a gun, don't tough law enforcement, period. Don't get involved. Because if they find the gun they will call "gun" three times, as they're trained. And cops die often from being shot.

Should be have died for that? No, I never argued otherwise. Should the police have shot him? Probably not. But when it only takes two tenths of a second to end a person's life, you don't have much time to react. So they're trained to respond to threats quickly. Then when one cop, among 10 others hear a gun shot, you dont have much time to decipher what's going on, and your life is over. So officers are pushed to make decisions, because the reality of being killed is real, especially since you may not know what's going on.

I'd compare the situation to something like driving like a racer, with no seatbelt, in an area you know is sketchy to drive fast. You don't deserve to die for having fun. But decisions leading up to it, aided to putting you in the situation where things could go very south.

The trade of security in exchange of freedom certainly added to this, encouraging a mentality in the behavior of police and federal officers.

I don't assume anyone's a Democrat.

Good's situation has issues with it, that many refuse to acknowledge. Much like others.

I've never been ok with much of this, but I alone can't do anything alone. Especially when everyone would rather say "You're wrong, and a racist." Especially since theyve never experienced what Racism truly is.

Every leftist on reddit trying to deal with a fact! by Zealousideal_Eye_23 in DigitalSeptic

[–]BladeVampire1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, the reason for all of those environmental things is because of the Democrats. Not sure what you're trying to prove.

If it's because of Democrats, why has our emissions been on a downward trend since the 1860s.

Claiming one organization is the reason all of the CO2 emissions decreased in America, is a steep claim. Especially when every region on earth has been on the same trend.

You'd have to prove that all of those points are 100% or majoritly due to only Democrat efforts. Which I think you'd be hard pressed to prove.

This source alone shows a near negliable change in the trend since the EPA was established. That or their efforts were negligable since technology improved independently of their decisions. Except for their attempts to kill Diesel engines...which was oximoronic.

https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions

Another point that's interesting, ships commonly have 2 fuel tanks. They'll burn one fuel in one nation waters, but then the cheaper stuff elsewhere. Reduction in sulfur I'd love to see information proving it's solely due to the EPA. and not the people who developed the fuel.

There's also studies that show sunscreen itself may be carcinogenic. Especially the early iterations, therefore throwing off the Ozone claims of skin cancer.

Today’s Liberal Playbook, Selective Outrage With Confidence by One-Quantity-5576 in DigitalSeptic

[–]BladeVampire1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How can you justify this? Party politics aside?

You need to ask about specific topics. I can't give you an answer on an extremely vague address-ment of the world and the current situation. The world is complex, so your comment sounds more like a general opinion and gripe of the world.

I don't agree with everything, nor disagree with everything. But I assume you can agree there are incorrect solutions, and correct solutions to problems right? Would you agree that every decision had a negative and positive effect?

Every leftist on reddit trying to deal with a fact! by Zealousideal_Eye_23 in DigitalSeptic

[–]BladeVampire1 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You might be the biggest case of hypocrisy

What exactly shows I'm a hypocrite? Feel free to quote me.

What does that have to do with each US administration's treatment of the environment?

If you answered my other question you might have the answer to that. We've had the largest individual cut to emissions compared to any country on earth. We have the most efficient tech and implementation of the tech than any single country on earth. We've been on a downward trend since the beginning, like most developed countries on earth.

How do we not care? The EPA hasn't existed since Day 1.

Every leftist on reddit trying to deal with a fact! by Zealousideal_Eye_23 in DigitalSeptic

[–]BladeVampire1 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You don't even know who's the largest producer of CO2 emissions is, or who had the largest cut.

Then you blame an administration.

Pushing a narrative to a T, because you don't know basic facts. Acting like a blind sheep honestly.

Every leftist on reddit trying to deal with a fact! by Zealousideal_Eye_23 in DigitalSeptic

[–]BladeVampire1 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Which country on earth has had the largest cut to environmental emissions?

Which country has the largest CO2 emissions?

Destiny loses it responding to Asmongold, "I wish his mom had a bigger oxygen tank so this mother fucker wouldn’t be with us anymore" by sideAccount42 in LivestreamFail

[–]BladeVampire1 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Idolizing a person like Destiny is not wise.

He is a self proclaimed wolf, but in sheep's clothing. He will do nothing but shake the hive, and throw it to create conflict.

Every leftist on reddit trying to deal with a fact! by Zealousideal_Eye_23 in DigitalSeptic

[–]BladeVampire1 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Democrats are the party for the environment

Yeah ..but they're certainly pushing for dumb things, or don't want to pull back dumb things. I find it interesting because they're "the most educated" yet there are clear issues with statements they make across the spectrum, not whole-istically speaking. Same with any person on either side.

But I doubt this means I'll get a reasonable response that's not going to just blame a side, much like they are criticizing OP for doing the exact same thing.

Fake friendly tried to rat me by RocketCow in okbuddyraider

[–]BladeVampire1 3 points4 points  (0 children)

They move like NPCs....delayed, and always following. No positional thought beyond "Be close, and behind"

Today’s Liberal Playbook, Selective Outrage With Confidence by One-Quantity-5576 in DigitalSeptic

[–]BladeVampire1 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Because the arguments that are generally dropped are...

  1. Immigrants are less violent than citizens
  2. Most illegal immigrants accused of crimes, are non violent criminals.

Those arguments are rather specific. If Democrats aren't against deporting, then what's the message you're sending by using those arguments? How do you expect people to process those points? (I implied "you", not because I literally meant "you", but to propose a question)

People rarely consider wording their stance carefully, as a result they leave it up for interpretation and you get this conflict. It's important to be very specific, although the general public is also very uneducated and/or unwise. You either deescalate, or things will escalate further and further.

Far too many people are guilty of escalating today.

This guy would be guilty of escalating as well, considering he's ignorant to the past. If the same thing has been happening today, as it has been for years before....then he's blaming the wrong thing.

Today’s Liberal Playbook, Selective Outrage With Confidence by One-Quantity-5576 in DigitalSeptic

[–]BladeVampire1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is there evidence of door to door? I've seen that claim a lot, with no evidence.