You make a good point. When you see a stranger write the word “people” on the internet, they are talking about you, NicholasGurr, The One Person That Exists

Don't engage the troll whose alias can be shortened to "NicGurr" a near-homophone for a slur.

My comment is better than anything you or these other two re‎tards brought to the thread.

Get fu‎cked, ni‎gger.

Let’s recap the argument:

1. Seems like they busted a collector.

2. Yeah but what if he was ISIS?!?

3. I wouldn’t care unless there was evidence of a plan to carry out an attack.

4. Easy to say “in theory,” but if an attack did happen, “people” would see it as retroactive evidence

ME: I still don’t see it that way, here are simple reasons why.

You: Uhhhh but he just said PEOPLE.

Pose an actual argument for why it should be viewed as evidence. Musing about what other people might think is passive noncommittal bullshit. What do YOU think? Do you have an actual argument that doesn’t involve outsourcing ethics to the majority? I don’t care about “what people think,” I care about the reasons behind it.

Some people think that we should send criminals to prison specifically so they get raped as punishment. While we can acknowledge that such an idea exists, I wouldn’t put it forth as one seriously worth considering on an intellectual level. It’s like joining a thread where people are discussing Earth’s path around the sun to interject, some people think the Earth is flat! Okay, explain more about why it matters to the discussion, aside from attempting to use it to invalidate something someone else just said about their own thoughts or opinions.

- Nick Gurr