The insane social justice thread

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Status
    Not open for further replies.

    actaeon277

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Nov 20, 2011
    95,233
    113
    Merrillville

    ArcadiaGP

    Wanderer
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Jun 15, 2009
    31,729
    113
    Indianapolis
    Looks like Google is happy to jump onto the wage gap myth bandwagon

    Bs4oxEM.png
     

    actaeon277

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Nov 20, 2011
    95,233
    113
    Merrillville

    I don't ever remember questions like that before.
    And, I don't believe it's any of the gov'ts business.


    I was going to post this in the 2A forum...but it's just so bloody insane I decided on here instead.

    Nevada Bill Would Allow Criminals to Sue Victims Who Defend Themselves | 2ANews.us

    Democrats. Trying to work as hard at losing elections as the Republicans work at losing elections.
     

    historian

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 15, 2009
    3,317
    63
    SD by residency, Hoosier by heart
    Posting here, because relevant to previous discussion.

    Looks like WSJ got caught doctoring content

    https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/6329h0/evidence_that_wsj_used_fake_screenshots/

    This is HUGE. Advertisers like Toyota, Coca-cola, and Starbucks pulled ads because of this bull**** hitpiece.

    I hope all three of them, and Google, sue for libel and defamation. I want to see the WSJ ****ing burn.

    Nope. https://heatst.com/culture-wars/you...ll-street-journal-of-falsifying-evidence/amp/

    WSJ is right.
     

    ArcadiaGP

    Wanderer
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Jun 15, 2009
    31,729
    113
    Indianapolis

    Full disclosure: Heat Street is owned by Dow Jones, which is also the parent company of the Wall Street Journal.

    Not necessarily. The retraction was because the claim wasn't 100% solid, and could have been wrong. Not that it was wrong.

    It's possible the videos had the ads, but the WSJ (much like their previous hit-pieces) went directly to the advertisers rather than attempt any communication with the people involved. Still cost Google money in the end, as well as the content creators. So it may turn out that this WSJ article wasn't faked, but that doesn't make it any less SJW'y.

    Other YouTubers re-created the situation, showing that it's absolutely possible no ads should have ran alongside a video claimed for copyright content. So the lesson here is... claims like this shouldn't be made without being 100% sure. Klein saw an oddity and didn't dig into it further before getting a video out on it.
     
    Last edited:

    actaeon277

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Nov 20, 2011
    95,233
    113
    Merrillville


    I'm still trying to wrap my heads around this.
    Do these people just not think that the rules could then be used AGAINST them?
    Or, they don't care, as long as their "side" is on top..
     

    ArcadiaGP

    Wanderer
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Jun 15, 2009
    31,729
    113
    Indianapolis
    My favorite was... I think the "freedom bus" one... where the people claimed "Words, in this case, are violence."

    No. Not now. Not ever. Words are not violence.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,258
    113
    Gtown-ish

    :soapbox:

    Gosh, I hate the term "reverse discrimination".

    Racial discrimination is discrimination against another person's race. To say that there can only be discrimination by a majority race against minority races is utter nonsense.

    If we want to take the words literally, "reverse discrimination" would be when a person discriminates against his or her own race. For example, Rachel Dolezol could be said to have reverse discrimination in the literal sense because she hates whites, and she is white. The white social justice warriors can be said to commit reverse discrimination when they spew hatred for others just because they're white.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.
    Top Bottom