#4
no....I don't think we'll ever be rid of it, but it's certainly not necessary
Quote by ThinLizzyFan
I love you



Who's in a bunker?
Who's in a bunker?
Women and children first
And the children first
And the children
#5
war is peace
freedom is slavery
ignorance is strength
"If you're going to try, go all the way. Otherwise don't even start..."
Charles Bukowski
#6
We need to have at least some violence or else everybody would just do what they want and nothing would get done
Quote by WantsLesPaul
I get such a big rush from downloading torrents that I just have to cum all over my face right at that moment.
#11
If we didn't have violence, women would think they could just walk out of the kitchen and get jobs. I think that answers your question.
If it were socially acceptable, I would drape myself in velvet.

Quote by Bassist1992
When I was 11.

Googled "I would like to watch some porn please"



Quote by daytripper75
I;m rdruk I feel no pain

#12
Quote by Le_Bunny
No.

I can't think of any situation that couldn't (hypothetically) be resolved peacefully.

Professional kickboxing?
#15
Quote by oncetaken
if we didn't have violence, there might be no metal

What about Christian Metal?
#16
Well, violence makes the 6:00 news more interesting. So yes.
XIAOXI
#18
We need violence to be enforce stuff. To make others knoiw what is ours/mine.

It's just not neccesary to go start an all out war with some guy behind a paper sending us to die and affect others with war and Sh*t. Controlling us like a board game.

Well thats my thought...
Turtles R awesome. dont agree? YOU GO TO HELL, YOU GO TO HELL AND YOU DIE!


PSN: Purple-munky

Gear...
Ion - acoustic guitar.
Cort KX1Q - i smashed it
Fender Super Champ XD 15w
Stagg G-310 - i smashed it.
#19
Quote by LuckyBoys91
If we didn't have violence, women would think they could just walk out of the kitchen and get jobs. I think that answers your question.

this guy knows his stuff
Quote by scott58
Worst? I don't know. My buddies old MG 10 until we turned it into a cup holder and ash tray.
#21
Not really, but it is vital to our survival since we're all batshit insane.
Most of the important things


in the world have been accomplished


by people who have kept on


trying when there seemed to be no hope at all
#22
We need peace, only because it's the best time to strategise for your next war
O what a disgrace if such a despised and base race, which worships demons, should conquer a people which has the faith of omnipotent God and is made glorious with the name of Christ!

The music winners listen to
#24
Yes, we need violence. People evolved to be violent as it is necessary for survival.
#25
Quote by The_Raven

OMG U SO FUNNAY!!!!!!!!!!!1111!!11!!!11!!!!!!!11 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA LULLLL!!!!



That isn't funny, nor is it shocking. It just shows ignorance and general douche-baginess. Pretending to be a sexist is just as funny as sexism itself.

...Aaaand he's obviously not being serious.

Quote by Zaphikh
Professional kickboxing?

How 'bout bullfighting? Can you reason with a bull? Hmmmmm.
Quote by metabolicmaggot
Win. +1 cookie for hide the beer.

#26
^ Not sure if you're agreeing with me or not.
But I'd rather be the /murderer, etc./ than the victim.
And there really is not enough in this world for everybody. Not that I am a murderer, but if survival were a competition, I wouldn't hesitate.
#27
What about with wars? I know some wars can be solved with peaceful solutions but some people just can't be reasoned with. Do you think people like hitler would respond well with peaceful solutions? I personally don't think so. I think people like that are so greedy that they can't be reasoned with which in turns would spark quarrels with other countries. It is kind of like the kid who doesn't respond to punishment until he is spanked (the whole spanking thing is another debate) Same things with world leaders, some won't listen to treaties or negotiations until they are beaten in a war. I don't know that is just my point of view. I just think that some people are so hard headed or unbalanced that they can't be fairly reasoned with.
frog_friend and WGP: UG's Kramer brotherhood

Ug's 4th ENGL endorser
Randy Rhoads is god
founder of the "ENGL amps" fanclub. PM me to join
#28
We don't need violence, that's what separates us from animals. They kill and do violent things to survive, and only that reason. We have no need to be violent.

When was the last time you saw a lion setting off explosives and killing for fun? Being more civilized, we should be less violent than animals.

So, short answer: **** NO
#29
Ah, the spanking debate! I think kids who were spanked grow up to be more sane than kids whose parents scream at them all the time.

Also don't judge Hitler 'cause you probably never actually knew Hitler.
#30
Quote by The_Raven
Because humans are still evolving, with all the natural selection going on lately And it's so hard to survive (in developed countries) these days isn't it...good thing we have all this violence to keep things a-okay!


I like your way of thinking. I definitely think violence, in general, is a bad thing. Anything like battles, wars, "violent" violence (murder, rape, beating, assault)...all that stuff is atrocious and unacceptable in my opinion but small little fights, whilst not good, aren't terrible. And of course, friendly fighting and all that is okay.


I agree Le_Bunny I think people are quite violence-obsessed in general, which is no surprise considering how society portrays it.


I really hope I detect sarcasm there...


OMG U SO FUNNAY!!!!!!!!!!!1111!!11!!!11!!!!!!!11 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA LULLLL!!!!



That isn't funny, nor is it shocking. It just shows ignorance and general douche-baginess. Pretending to be a sexist is just as funny as sexism itself.

Dude you're so smart

Quote by RinestoneCowboy
We don't need violence, that's what separates us from animals. They kill and do violent things to survive, and only that reason. We have no need to be violent.

When was the last time you saw a lion setting off explosives and killing for fun? Being more civilized, we should be less violent than animals.

So, short answer: **** NO

Wait! Hold that thought.

http://www.cracked.com/article_15853_6-cutest-animals-that-can-still-destroy-you.html

Read the part about the dolphins
Last edited by Oroborous at Nov 3, 2009,
#31
Quote by RinestoneCowboy
We don't need violence, that's what separates us from animals. They kill and do violent things to survive, and only that reason. We have no need to be violent.

When was the last time you saw a lion setting off explosives and killing for fun? Being more civilized, we should be less violent than animals.

So, short answer: **** NO


They kill to survive. Okay, unless you're vegan YOU DO TOO.

We are no more civilized than any other animal. Think of all the civilized animals: bees, ants, dolphins, meercats, lemurs, . . .

In fact, we are not different from other animals. Animals have languages we don't understand, animals build their homes. . .

In fact, sometimes animals do kill for fun. Dogs do.
#32
Quote by Sickhick
They kill to survive. Okay, unless you're vegan YOU DO TOO.

We are no more civilized than any other animal. Think of all the civilized animals: bees, ants, dolphins, meercats, lemurs, . . .

In fact, we are not different from other animals. Animals have languages we don't understand, animals build their homes. . .

In fact, sometimes animals do kill for fun. Dogs do.

Ah ****, I made myself look retarded. Good point.

I meant that most animals aren't capable of realizing or comprehending what violence is. They don't think about it the way we do, they're thinking to survive. Humans have this mindset of blood and death that is seemingly insatiable in some people for no reason.
#33
Quote by frog_friend
What about with wars? I know some wars can be solved with peaceful solutions but some people just can't be reasoned with. Do you think people like hitler would respond well with peaceful solutions? I personally don't think so. I think people like that are so greedy that they can't be reasoned with which in turns would spark quarrels with other countries. It is kind of like the kid who doesn't respond to punishment until he is spanked (the whole spanking thing is another debate) Same things with world leaders, some won't listen to treaties or negotiations until they are beaten in a war. I don't know that is just my point of view. I just think that some people are so hard headed or unbalanced that they can't be fairly reasoned with.

Well the situation is supposedly that humankind would be completely free of violence. If that were possible and was the case, then people wouldn't need to defend themselves from the attacks of others - sure there may remain greedy and horrible people, but what people fight for are their lives and their freedom. Should enslavement arise, I'd imagine the only thing stopping them from freedom would be a dictator or ruler witholding food provisions... hmm.


Edit: With the we-must-kill-animals-to-survive thought, I took this as the idea of only unnecessary physical violence of other people. I wouldn't consider killing animals (in a humane way) to eat as violence but necessity.
Last edited by Le_Bunny at Nov 3, 2009,
#34
Okay, unnecessary violence to other people. If someone gives you a lot of crap, and you try to ignore them, reason with them, etc. and nothing works, they probably are not going to leave you alone until you hit them.
On the other hand, attacking someone you don't know is wrong. But if you were really hungry, it may make sense to rob someone.
#36
We can never acheive total peace. Ironically we need problems to progress. If it were happiness from day one and no one had an issue with anything we'd never get anywhere.
#37
Quote by Le_Bunny
Well the situation is supposedly that humankind would be completely free of violence. If that were possible and was the case, then people wouldn't need to defend themselves from the attacks of others - sure there may remain greedy and horrible people, but what people fight for are their lives and their freedom. Should enslavement arise, I'd imagine the only thing stopping them from freedom would be a dictator or ruler witholding food provisions... hmm.


Edit: With the we-must-kill-animals-to-survive thought, I took this as the idea of only unnecessary physical violence of other people. I wouldn't consider killing animals (in a humane way) to eat as violence but necessity.
Okay so lets say that we did live in a world that had no violence. Say someone came up who kept causing trouble for the people and we tried to peacefully resolve things but nothing seemed to get through. He starts becoming more bold and aggressive. Would it be right to use force to keep him controlled? I guess it is kind of like the one guy that always has to start a fight a concert or a party. Everyone can be having a great time and everything going really well but then someone gets it in their mind that they want to start a fight/push someone/ or just do something that ruins the mood of the whole thing. You can try to tell that guy to calm down but most of the time he won't listen. It usually takes a bouncer throwing his ass out to get him to stop. I just think that even if we did live in a world without violence sooner or later someone will ruin it by doing something. There just always seems to be that one person.
frog_friend and WGP: UG's Kramer brotherhood

Ug's 4th ENGL endorser
Randy Rhoads is god
founder of the "ENGL amps" fanclub. PM me to join
#38
Yes. Without war we wouldn't know what peace was.
If there wasn't light we wouldn't know darkness.
Good - Bad
Right - Wrong
Fast - Slow
There's a yin and a yang to everything. If we didn't have the one, we wouldn't know or appreciate the other. There may be some that may say ignorance is bliss. I dunno, it's a slippery road. The world comes in twos. For what reason I couldn't tell you, but it's a goal to have as little of the bad and as much of the good. For the bad to be completely gone....I dunno. Would bad come from too much good? .........................


(am I talkin out my ass? lol)
#39
Personally, I'm a pacifist. The only thing that causes violence is violence. One must always break the cycle - call it forgiveness, turning the other cheek, self-control, whatever. It is only a certain useless aspect of our human character, an evolutionary hang-over which leads us towards violence. Humanity is now its own worst enemy because of overpopulation, avarice and greed, caused in no small part by the meaningless free-market society in which we find ourselves.

Oh, and saying 'if there was no war we wouldn't know what peace was' is painfully fallacious. It's a right-wing fiction that good can only be defined in contrast to a perceived evil - and indeed that simply assumes a deeper dialectical form of conflict in itself.