Yfw the no singles policy is a real thing in los angeles

>yfw the no singles policy is a real thing in los angeles
how do we stop the memes from transcending into reality?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=2TqSyvdqn9c
twitter.com/AnonBabble

this has been long overdue
do you know what it's like to try to enjoy a nice day out with your kids but there's a creepy man you see everyday staring your general direction each time you go?
god I've had to tell my children to stay away from him every time we visit
that's not what a parent should have to do when they want to have a nice day out with their family
I fully support this becoming the law of the land

>go for a nice stroll
>get arrested
America land of the free

he sits down facing the swings almost every day for hours on end and does nothing but writes stuff on a notebook periodically. that's not normal behavior

He is just gettin comfy on a bench.

artist
psychologist
philosopher
composer
child protection services

all of these people do what you describe

have you ever tried being a normal human being and just talking to the guy to see what he's up too if you're so concerned? that proposed law is bullshit, and i'm fairly sure its unconstitutional to boot, welcome to being an enemy of the state

>go to park to work on novel.
>sit down, benches happen to be near play area cuz that's where parents want to sit
>jot things down in my notebook
>SWAT team pulls up
>"Why hello offi-"
>Get hit by tazor brand tazor at 50,000 volts
>Get locked up for no reason at all

Cal-exit pls.

oh of course its California, fucking left-fascists

>psychologist
I don't want a psycho(logist) observing my kids for some pervy field study, and that's my right as an american

Lmfao but la wont do anything about the gangs still huh

that's where you're wrong kiddo, welcome to the nanny state, and you obviously voted and willed to live in a world that does exactly that. and you won't get that "right" back anytime soon i'm sure

>I don't want to bother being responsible for my family's safety, so take that man's freedoms and rights to the commons away for me pleaseandthankyou: the post.

Good thing they wont implement that here. I like sitting in benches at the park alone of course.

>People minding their own business is a problem.

Califag here. It's cunts like you that are ruining our state. Neck yourself please.

just because the chair is the only thing not on fire in the kitchen doesn't mean you're ok, leaf

our gang problem is just blown out of proportion by outsiders because we have a bad rep from the 80s/90s. LA is among the safest major cities to live in in America. And guess what? the only other major cities safer than it are in California as well.

>blah blah blah nanny state blah blah blah freedoms
we obviously have different positions so it should come as no surprise to you that I don't value the same things as you

Maybe you should stop being paranoid.

Then dont take your children to public spaces.

>>blah blah blah nanny state blah blah blah freedoms

and yet...

>and that's my right as an american

error

>in an attempt to make parks seem super safe
>seem

Says more about liberals than anything else ever good

Now I'm going to fuck your children merely out of spite.

It's my bench, faggot!

there are different concepts of rights if you didn't know. I'm arguing for rights which restrict the actions of others in order to help me, you guys are arguing for rights which restricts the actions of the government in order to help you

Fine then we privatize the parks so only those who use them pay for them. Enjoy paying $20 to have your shit play in some dirt.

Suprised this happened in the american capital of leftism

Assuming that only applies to niggers what's the problem?

OT1H this seems pretty reasonable because adults "enjoying" a playground looks ridiculous and has no real reason. OTOH sometimes I'm this guy, because it's the only bench/park type of place around.

Oh shit is this me?

Leave. America. Now.

You're ideologically incompatible at a fundamental level.

What if we have a singles bench that faces away from the kiddie swing?

yea you fucked up, and should probably seek residence in a country which holds your special snowflake definition of "rights"

agree with this guy

Honestly black people come to the park from the community housing nearby at like 12-3 am and make a lot of noise which I'm not fond of. Once there was this super scary black guy that seemed drunk and was wearing a Ghana flag as a cape and came and sat next to me and started smoking. I had to leave. It'd be racist to exclude them though.

YOUR RIGHTS END WHERE MY FEELINGS BEGIN

it's one of those benches with two rows of seats on opposite sides so he already has the option of facing away from the swings, yet he chooses not to

>your special snowflake definition of "rights
it's not some esoteric definition. it's the definition most leftists in america agree on. and I am far from ideologically incompatible with america. radicals don't even believe in rights, I do. I just have a definition that agrees more with the average leftist than the average right winger

there's a whole ideological basis for this position that you seem completely unaware of. instead you're looking at my position with your one set of reasoning in mind completely baffled that I could take such a stand

Funny, this is well phrased. For future reference."Government powers end where citizens' rights begin" is supposed to be U.S. Constitutional Canon.

>a whole ideological basis
Yeah, one that is complete anathema to the American ideology.

I'm beyond arguing with your kind. Your ilk needs a genocide.

You aren't arguing for rights of any kind; merely expansion of government powers by the curtailing of citizen's rights. You are a homewrecker. Leave or die.

you guys are arguing for negative rights. I'm arguing for positive rights. It's not unamerican to advocate for positive rights considering that we have a ton of them, and they've been the primary additions to our constitution for the last 100 years

>whole ideological basis

you want a nanny state you are literally no more intelligent than that, there's nothing to miss

you're a fucking city boy with shitty kids that probably average the same test scores as capuchins & you want something bigger than you to do your damn paternal job

don't have any more kids, it's hard enough raising my cousin, it sucks knowing that there's more pussies out you mishandling the development of a human mind

you are unqualified as a father. you will inevitably fail, & one day, realize that you have no other answers, you don't know any other way to raise them, you don't have the ability to change & it wormy have gone any better if you had a second chance

you will fail them when they need you most & you will watch their lives & hate what you've done

you will fail them

>Being this entitled

When will you ban people from walking on th street because it infringes your "rights".

There's no such thing as "positive rights".
You have no right to force anyone to do anything.
Do you have a right to eat?

not an argument

>that proposed law is bullshit,

yeah it's unenforceable anyway but maybe parents will pay more attention, you always get one nasty old creeper at the beach with all the women and children just sitting there with his hands in his pockets

I always go ask him what the fuck his problem is and he runs off

fucking weirdos

>positive rights

get a goddamn CC permit & if anybody fucks with your kids let them know they ain't going to

not trying to argue. i want to to understand your inabilities.

>Be tolerant liberal
>propose bill to ban people based on their preference
I wish I could laugh at this but it's so common..

the only basis for all concepts of "rights" is philosophical, that's not only for positive rights. even negative rights have a philosophical basis and nothing more. we just have a philosophical disagreemtn

>disagreemtn
disagreement*

THERE
IS
NO
SUCH
THING
AS
POSITIVE
RIGHTS
Get that through your fucking skull.
You cannot use the government to force people to act a certain way and claim you're simply defending your rights.

Maybe he's just shy and socially awkward. Not everyone is normal so stop harassing him.

So your telling me if I want to chill at the park with a good novel and some fresh crabslegs, I'm going to have to drag my anvil along too to avoid being arrested?!

OP is a faggot

When my brats and their little buddies are frolicking in the park I don't want to have to scare off creeps all the time

It's more of a big deal when you have some Sup Forums looking motherfucker skulking about

I understand it's weird but the precedence this sets is hilarious.

Liberals like to make things illegal because they're too scared to confront problems directly.

>there's such a thing as a positive pressure vacuum
>actually user no here's the science explaining why
>weeeellll we just have a disagreement of opinion

are you jewish or a woman? you argue like one. you never directly dismantle an argument, you just sidle around it

>oy vey, how do we arrest goys who haven't done anything wrong yet?
>I got it, we arrest any single men that happen to be 10 feet from a child, then we cook something up later

first cinemas now this!

>tfw 19 and like to swing at parks and write poetry
>tfw it's now illegal

But shoot the pedophiles tho.

As someone who frequently uses Playgrounds as a dead drop location I find this to be most obnoxious. They have high foot traffic and multiple exits in multiple directions.

Reee

Kill yourself

why are you guys so thickheaded? You say "there's no such thing as x" so I say "I agree that it doesn't exist in anyway more than a philosophical sense, but that applies to x as well as y and x and so on". So you reply "THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS X". Are you deliberately obfuscating? I'm trying to explain our differences but you're just trying to announce that we are different. We started this conversation knowing that we hold different positions so your posts are not getting us anywhere. I'm trying to at least make us understand each other more clearly so we don't resort to name calling and general division. This is how we come to agreements, but it doesn't work when only one party is attempting to do that.

>positive pressure vacuum
huh?

now you know why the government wants more control
>we think this guy is dead dropping, but we have no reasonable cause to search him
>oh I know!
all under the guise of ((((for the children))))

>as y and x and so on
y and z*

>tfw I take my dog to the park and get my morning jog
>this would become illegal in LA

That's a bit ridiculous, but thankfully I live in a red state.

>it's one of those benches with two rows of seats on opposite sides so he already has the option of facing away from the swings, yet he chooses not to

Have you tried talking to this person? That's what non-autistic people do.

find a little kid to hang out with, problem solved

"our differences" are the same differences that a person claiming square circles exist and person calling them a retard experience.
You can write whole books about how "it's a philosophical difference" but that's nothing more than dancing around the issue that you claim you have the right to mandate behavior.

well in LA soon enough a civil union between animal and human will be socially acceptable, so you can merely point out you're with your partner and not alone

If you think it won't be ten times worse if you secede....

"Think of the children" - the rallying cry of airhead soccer mom's who would sacrifice freedom for nanny state safety. The world is a dangerous place, has been and always will be, and fucking parents have sole responsibility for their offspring when their with them, not the state.

Guess what? Nobody gives a fuck about your crotch fruit but you-witness the toddler repeatedly crushed like a grape by cars in that Chinese video-and their safety shall not come at the expense of everyone else because you are fucking lazy.

I guarantee this would be unfairly enforced against single men, rather than lone women, too in typical mysandronistic form.

thinking and acting for yourself? no no no. better let the professionals handle it. could be dangerous.

That's overkill, we should limit the law to just white males.

Why don't you go to a place that isn't shit. you fucking autist

your post is the conclusion you've come to after reading my posts. you haven't given me your reasoning. that's what I'm after.

your conclusions:
1. our differences are not philosophical differences
2. I am dancing around the issue by claiming that we have philosophical differences

How did you come to those conclusions? what you said about square circles is just illustrating your conclusion, it's not the reasoning behind it.

What am I looking at? Looks spoopy.

So no more walking in the park for me because some paranoid parents cant be bothered to watch their kids. I am so happy I dont live near commiefornia what a waste of a state.

>think local politicians are fugging kids at a local pizzeria
>decide to stake the place out from your car and snap some pics
>immediately arrested for being near a place children frequent
I can think of endless ways this could play out

You haven't given me any reasoning either.
Prove to me you have the right to use the state to mandate people behave "the right way"

I'll pass.
People already think I'm 15.
>forever babyfaced

This right here if park use is restricted then federal money should not fund them. Have fun paying out of pocket for your kid to use the swing because that guy on the bench shouldn't have to pay for a public space he cannot use.

>You haven't given me any reasoning either.
I never tried to provide the reasoning that supports positive rights. My first post in this line of conversation was a reaction to the post saying that positive rights don't exist. The reasoning I have presented is support for the conclusion that all rights are only based on philosophy. You can refute this by showing me anything that isn't a philosophical support for rights but I don't think you'll be able to which is why I have presented it as my position. Most people know that the philosophy of John Locke inspired the negative concept of rights in America, so there's the philosophical base for that I am using to support my position. Is that wrong, is there more than just philosophy to negative rights?
>Prove to me you have the right to use the state to mandate people behave "the right way"
that's never been what this discussion is about. if you want to discuss that after we finish our discussion I described above then I'd be happy to do that

Forget what you saw

>that's never been what this discussion is about
You're arguing you're justified in outlawing single men from going to parks.
If that's not "mandating behavior" nothing is.

>be me
>be wealthy single gut considering kids
>go to playground to see how they act
>write down perceived pros and cons in notebook
>do his for awhile to build baseline
>notice parents staring at me
>be white male
>forget it's current year being white or male is punishable by death
>parents post my picture on social media accusing me of being a child stalker
>get death threats
>move to Croatia because this shit is fucking gay
>live out days in Sup Forums Holy Land

you are deliberately obfuscating now. address the first part of the post or I'm done with this conversation

What would happen to this nice old man in today's world? youtube.com/watch?v=2TqSyvdqn9c

Back in the good old days, nobody gave a fuck about soccer mom shit like turning public parks into "safe spaces" for suburban tyrants. There were just as many psychos and pervs back then, from Ed Gein to the 19th century "Murder Hotel", but folks took reality like fucking men instead of scared pussies.

>this has been long overdue
>do you know what it's like to try to enjoy a nice day out with your kids but there's a creepy man you see everyday staring your general direction each time you go?
>god I've had to tell my children to stay away from him every time we visit
>that's not what a parent should have to do when they want to have a nice day out with their family
>I fully support this becoming the law of the land
Tell me how I've "obfuscated" your desire to control the lives of free Americans.

>I'm arguing for rights which restrict the actions of others in order to help me
you were doing a good job until this part, faggot

Dead drop?

I've literally had a lady come up to me at public park and demand to know what I was doing there alone.
Super bitchy and accusatory.
At first she didn't believe me that I was there with my gfs 2 youngest sisters and their friend.
Had to call them over to me for her to leave me alone.
She sort of apologized by saying any concerned mother could make such a mistake. Then left about 10 minutes later.

At the time I was:
>21
>fit to the point of 6 pack
>clean
>new clothes
>reading a book and not even looking up for the last 20 minutes

I mean, if I'd been a fat greasy slob, it would have made more sense.

1 post by this ID

In any case, some people like to have routine, I take the exact same fucking stroll and sit at the same place everyday, let the man be.
Or you know, say hello and ask what he's up to you immense autist. Why are you fuckers arguing over rights, there's no debate to he had: you talk to him, either he explains, or he's suspicious and you call the cops.

>pay taxes that help fund and maintain parks
>not allowed to use it

You are a very obvious troll

This is a good thing. I suppose there were lots of pedos in L.A and they have to start clamping down now.

A mode of exchanging everything from stolen secrets for the KGB in the cold war to drugs by leaving in a public place. Pic is how spies left shit for their handlers.

Shit didn't realize the schizo who's scared of pedophiles isn't OP

you are obfuscating because our discussion about rights started with me claiming that we are arguing for a different set of rights and you claimed that my rights don't exist. I said they exist in a philosophical sense and that is what you have objected to. I have been trying to get your reasoning for this but you are deliberately avoiding discussing this and now are insisting that we revert back to our previous discussion about whether we should implement this law. Do you understand that those are two different discussions? you never asked for why I support positive rights during the first discussion. you only asked for it once we started the second one. That is obfuscation because you began the second conversation by claiming positive rights don't exist, not asking me why I support positive rights. The entire second conversation centered around what you asked about initially and once you were asked to provide a non-philosophical basis for any kind of rights you asked a separate question in order to obfuscate. You are not trying to have a serious discussion, you are using cheap tricks that seem deliberate. Which is why I will not be talking with you anymore.

single NEET father here.

take my boys to parks frequently. never shave. never get hair cut. always wear single color (drab) t-shirt, mesh shorts, and rubber soled slippers.

other parents always give me the eye. no one has ever said anything to me though.

I would have asked to see her fucking kids if they were not obviously with her and called her out for being a mysandronist.

You're such a narcissistic retard you made a post so focused with yourself that it seems you've forgotten the mother is right in thinking perverts come in all shapes and sizes. She wants to protect her kid, whatever you seem to think about yourself isn't going to stop her.

fat greasy people still have the right to public parks

>I would have asked to see her fucking kids
kinky

The root of your philosophical masturbation was to justify controlling the behavior of free men.
Claim all you want "there are 2 arguments!!!!!", but when one argument is entirely predicated on the other, you don't have 2 separate arguments.
I'll still wait for your proof that you have the right to control the lives of free humans

Literally The Lobster