Cartoon Violence

[All Systems Go]

I think that people who are aginst violence in cartoons should consider this. they say that cartoons cause violent behaviour in children. What if it is the violence towards robots which removes the implications of violence. When you see violence in older cartoons you see them suffering. If you hit someone over the head then they appear at least (temporarily) hurt. Attacking non-living creatures removes any sense of restraint as you can do whatever you want. It removes any sense of responsiility for your actions.

[All Systems Go]

Originally Posted by big_horn

what are you suggesting ?
that all recipitants of violence should be non-human ?
i really don't think this will affect the moral development of our children.

no, no, no.

Read it over and try again.

[All Systems Go]

I'm saying that the pople who don't want to see violence towards humans to 'protect the kids' or whatever may inadvertantly be causeing more problems than they are solving by removing consequences from violence.

[Yahwe]

why do you think GD people are the people opposing violence in childrens cartoons?

[All Systems Go]

I don't.

[Yahwe]

yet you decided to bore us all with your inane rant anyway

kudos to you.

[1-X]

is he suggesting there is any significant organised group against cartoon violence?

he probably saw Marge Simpson protesting about Itchy and Scratchy and has trouble telling the difference between cartoons and reality

[JonnyBGood]

I don't think raising a generation of citizens who are sensitive as regards violence towards other human beings is a particularly good approach for our great country. What if we have to go to war against Liberia and nobody volunteers to march directly into the enemy machine-guns to clog their sights with their dead bodies so our helicopters can safely strafe their homes from heights providing a good clear line of sight? Everybody blames the increase in violence among children and adolescents on cartoon violence or computer-game violence. However shouldn't we be more concerned about the worrying increase of faggots in our society and the amount of wimps in our armed forces? I think we all know where the real problems lie in our society and the fact our government avoids these vitally important issues with their tacit support of the joint pro-gay, anti-racist movement is a stance I personally find morally reprehensible.

This election vote for the British National Party. We hate faggots too.

[Yahwe]

i find your political points compelling

i want to know more about your organisation

[All Systems Go]

It's about the lack of cartoon violence towards other people. Nowadays violence tends to be towards robots something. therefore you can be as violent as you want toward these creatures without any side-effects.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Yahwe

i find your political points compelling

i want to know more about your organisation

We have a group of twenty nine mildly retarded chimps currently working on assembling our manifesto by randomly plucking sentences from the manifestos of all other parties in the United Kingdom on an equal basis. I shall forward you a copy as soon as it is completed.



Apologies in advance for any fecal matter included in the envelope.

[Yahwe]

yes.

it was far better when all the violence was directed at a coyote

[All Systems Go]

Originally Posted by Yahwe

yes.

it was far better when all the violence was directed at a coyote

the coyote was only hurt by his own actions Violence has a consequence.

[Yahwe]

Originally Posted by All Systems Go

the coyote was only hurt by his own actions Violence has a consequence.

HELP IS AVAILABLE

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by All Systems Go

the coyote was only hurt by his own actions Violence has a consequence.

Heh. What consequences?

• Coyote runs off edge of cliff
• Coyote hangs in air for a few seconds in defiance of gravity
• Coyote glances down, then waves bye-bye at camera
• We see coyote falling several thousand feet and a small plume of dust on impact
• Cut to crater on canyon floor, coyote's arm rises out of crater holding a placard that reads 'Ouch'
• Cut to next scene where a perfectly healthy coyote proceeds with his next ill-fated scheme

If there were consequences, coyote would never have survived the first episode. :/

[Yahwe]

**stage whisper to tacitus**

He may be retarded

[All Systems Go]

Originally Posted by Tactitus

Heh. What consequences?

• Coyote runs off edge of cliff
• Coyote hangs in air for a few seconds in defiance of gravity
• Coyote glances down, then waves bye-bye at camera
• We see coyote falling several thousand feet and a small plume of dust on impact
• Cut to crater on canyon floor, coyote's arm rises out of crater holding a placard that reads 'Ouch'
• Cut to next scene where a perfectly healthy coyote proceeds with his next ill-fated scheme

If there were consequences, coyote would never have survived the first episode. :/

I don't believe animal cartoon violence? Who imitates them (apart from their catchphrases)? No kid grows up wanting to be a cartoon animal.

[JonnyBGood]

No, but I'm sure we can sell some to them before we go to war.

[s|k]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

No, but I'm sure we can sell some to them before we go to war.

Let's not. This is my 600th post. thx

[JamMak]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

No, but I'm sure we can sell some to them before we go to war.

Even if we don't, the French sure will.

They'll sell arms to anyone!

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by JamMak

Even if we don't, the French sure will.

They'll sell arms to anyone!

In 2003, the United States ranked first in the value of arms deliveries to developing nations at $6.3 billion, or 37.1% of all such deliveries. The United Kingdom ranked second at $4 billion or 23.5% of such deliveries. Russia ranked third at $3.3 billion or 19.4% of such deliveries.

[midge5]

Originally Posted by JamMak

They'll sell arms to anyone!

That would explain them being so armless

[Yahwe]

Britain must work harder if we are to compete!!

[JamMak]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

In 2003, the United States ranked first in the value of arms deliveries to developing nations at $6.3 billion, or 37.1% of all such deliveries. The United Kingdom ranked second at $4 billion or 23.5% of such deliveries. Russia ranked third at $3.3 billion or 19.4% of such deliveries.

Yes but i'm sure we only sell them to the nice politically unstable developing nations.

[Structural Integrity]

Originally Posted by All Systems Go

I think that people who are aginst violence in cartoons should consider this. they say that cartoons cause violent behaviour in children. What if it is the violence towards robots which removes the implications of violence. When you see violence in older cartoons you see them suffering. If you hit someone over the head then they appear at least (temporarily) hurt. Attacking non-living creatures removes any sense of restraint as you can do whatever you want. It removes any sense of responsiility for your actions.

So, cartoons where people get stabbed, and spray blood all over the place and have their guts falling on the floor and their eyes poked out in a gory way and get killed and never come back, are better than cartoons where where people get slapped but don't seem to react to the mistreatment?

I agree...

Shock 'n awe dude... shock 'n awe... let those kids see/feel what violence is about.

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by Nantoz

Much like the Americans sold the Germans weapons up untill -42?

Um, what weapons would those be?

The US was officially neutral until the end of 1941 and under the terms of the Neutrality Act, as amended in 1940, allowed "cash and carry" sales to either side but purchasers had to transport the arms on their own ships. In theory, this allowed sales to Germany but for the slight problem of the Royal Navy--which was patrolling the North Atlantic and effectively blockading axis ports.

Moreover, from 1939 to the end of 1941 there wasn't a single weapon in the US arsenal that was superior to anything the Germans were producing, with the possible exception of the B-17 bomber (and all B-17 production was ear-marked for the US Army Air Corps).

So I'm curious why the Germans would have been using their dwindling merchant fleet to transport inferior American weapons through the RN blockade.

[Yahwe]

he goades you

why react?

we [carried on] the stuggle until in god's good time. the new world. with all its power and might [stepped] fortward to the rescue and deliberation of the old.

the norwegians did bugger all

you saved us.

we gambled everything on your caring enough to save us.

there can be no criticism of your great nation.

you were detached, happy, prosperous. you could have ignored our cry.

we staked our all on your eventual help. it did not come quickly.
nake no mistake of it.
but it came.

for that you have our eternal gratitude.
you did not need to indebt us to you. to make your help a 'loan' but that is detail.

no matter how long it took.

eventually you joined our little nation, our dwindling empire. you saw that it was necessary to say no.

let the norwegian goade you. let him poke and prod. in the end. you came true. And without you darkness would have reigned.

it is easy to criticise the past. it should be easier to simply say thank you.

norway owes its existence to our stubborness. and to your resolve. be not so easily baited by the children of peace.

[Alki]

is it me or does nantoz come across as a tosser