[Tripper]

[quote="TK-423":b78dc]Being zapped with a taser is being electrocuted. I'm not comment on anything else, but a zap from a taser is definitely getting electrocuted.[/quote:b78dc]

I didn't know this but apparently the word itself technically means a fatal electric shock, despite the fact that most people nowadays would say they had been 'electrocuted' by an electric fence, or a power socket.

[c312]

[quote="TK-423":17f76]Being zapped with a taser is being electrocuted. I'm not comment on anything else, but a zap from a taser is definitely getting electrocuted.[/quote:17f76]

incorrect.

[RaNgeR]

[quote=c312]

Originally Posted by "TK-423":f315b

Being zapped with a taser is being electrocuted. I'm not comment on anything else, but a zap from a taser is definitely getting electrocuted.

incorrect.[/quote:f315b]

Gtfo...you have to be kidding right? Inform me what it is then; Im all ears.

[Tripper]

[quote=RaNgeR]

Originally Posted by c312

incorrect.

Gtfo...you have to be kidding right? Inform me what it is then; Im all ears.[/quote:0d43d]

\/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/


[quote=Tripper]

Originally Posted by "TK-423":0d43d

Being zapped with a taser is being electrocuted. I'm not comment on anything else, but a zap from a taser is definitely getting electrocuted.

I didn't know this but apparently the word itself technically means a fatal electric shock, despite the fact that most people nowadays would say they had been 'electrocuted' by an electric fence, or a power socket.[/quote:0d43d]



...He's right....

Pathetic to even argue something so ridiculously irrelevant though.

[TGB!]

[quote=RaNgeR]

Originally Posted by c312

incorrect.

Gtfo...you have to be kidding right? Inform me what it is then; Im all ears.[/quote:00fb3]

[url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/electrocution:00fb3]Left ear.[/url:00fb3]

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrocution:00fb3]Right ear.[/url:00fb3]

rolleyes:

The only reason its "irrelevant" - is because it sensationalizes your point. "Oh look the cops are electrocuting people". This is what they call intellectual dishonesty.

[RaNgeR]

TGB, what is it then? Im still waiting.

[TGB!]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_shock

Any other research you want me to do for you? sleeping:

[Tripper]

[quote="TGB!":0608b][quote=RaNgeR]

Originally Posted by c312

incorrect.

Gtfo...you have to be kidding right? Inform me what it is then; Im all ears.[/quote:0608b]

[url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/electrocution:0608b]Left ear.[/url:0608b]

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrocution:0608b]Right ear.[/url:0608b]

rolleyes:

The only reason its "irrelevant" - is because it sensationalizes your point. "Oh look the cops are electrocuting people". This is what they call intellectual dishonesty.[/quote:0608b]

You were fucking sensationalizing all over the place. Ridiculous.

This issue doesnt even matter to me because our government decided against police tasers, so good on ya whatever you win.



I prefer chokeholds and tackles to electric shocks....

[quote:0608b]Electroshock weapon technology uses a temporary high-voltage low-current electrical discharge to override the body's muscle-triggering mechanisms. The recipient feels great pain, and can be momentarily paralyzed while an electric current is being applied. It is reported that applying electroshock devices to more sensitive parts of the body is more painful. The relatively low electric current must be pushed by high voltage to overcome the electrical resistance of the human body. The resulting 'shock' is caused by muscles twitching uncontrollably, appearing as muscle spasms. However, because the amount of current is relatively low, there is considered to be a 'margin' of safety by a number of medical experts. Experts generally agree that this margin is highly dependent on the overall health of the person subjected to the shock. Usually, the higher the voltage, the more effective it is. It may take several seconds to subdue a subject with 100 kV, but only about a second with 1 MV (1,000 kV).[/quote:0608b]

[TGB!]

Congrats. You verified what we've been saying the entire thread. As soon as this batch finishes, I'll have a cookie for you.

And yea, might want to look up what sensationalizing means. . .hint, using extreme "sort of true" language to describe a situation qualifies as such. . .

[RaNgeR]

Its still electricity...

[c312]

The only reason I am nit picking is because I already stated the definition of electrocution and then some jackass comes in trying to say the exact opposite as some sort of definitive statement.

The only reason I said it in the first place is because I used to use it incorrectly and I think it's a good thing to know.

It really is stupid to argue, I knew what Tripper was saying, it's an extremely common misconception. That being said, I don't think Trip was trying to sensationalize anything, he was most likely just using a word that most people think is equivalent to being shocked. Not his fault--I knew what he meant--I just threw out the definition as a tidbit so people would know.

[Tripper]

[quote="TGB!":c0164]Congrats. You verified what we've been saying the entire thread. As soon as this batch finishes, I'll have a cookie for you.

And yea, might want to look up what sensationalizing means. . .hint, using extreme "sort of true" language to describe a situation qualifies as such. . .[/quote:c0164]

Sensationalizing. Yeah, you were doing that. You do that all the time. Anytime you use your emotive, often toungue-in-cheek, little descriptions that you think are so fucking clever, you always throw in a few considered, and alot of the time very much misleading adjectives to intensify and sensationalize your points. Its actually one of your main tactics.

Oh, and your cookies taste like shit, supernerd.

[Forte]

[quote=Tripper]

Originally Posted by "TGB!":bfd68

Congrats. You verified what we've been saying the entire thread. As soon as this batch finishes, I'll have a cookie for you.

And yea, might want to look up what sensationalizing means. . .hint, using extreme "sort of true" language to describe a situation qualifies as such. . .

Sensationalizing. Yeah, you were doing that. You do that all the time. Anytime you use your emotive, often toungue-in-cheek, little descriptions that you think are so fucking clever, you always throw in a few considered, and alot of the time very much misleading adjectives to intensify and sensationalize your points. Its actually one of your main tactics.

Oh, and your cookies taste like shit, supernerd.[/quote:bfd68]
just a week until our birthday hun.

[TGB!]

[quote:24f65]sen·sa·tion·al·ize (sěn-sā'shə-nə-līz') Pronunciation Key
tr.v. sen·sa·tion·al·ized, sen·sa·tion·al·iz·ing, sen·sa·tion·al·iz·es
To cast and present in a manner intended to arouse strong interest, especially through inclusion of exaggerated or lurid details: "doubted the ability of the liberal press to handle such information fairly, to refrain from sensationalizing it" (Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein). [/quote:24f65]

For example, saying someone was ELECTROCUTED (which is explicit in its meaning) rather than ELECTRO SHOCKED; or, I dunno, saying someone was "forced to the ground", rather than "tripped on his feet resisting arrest". Just because a bunch of fools use language improperly - doesn't make it any less wrong.

[quote:24f65]Anytime you use your emotive, often toungue-in-cheek, little descriptions that you think are so fucking clever, you always throw in a few considered, and alot of the time very much misleading adjectives to intensify and sensationalize your points.[/quote:24f65]

For example? No, never mind. At this point its pretty obvious your grasp of English is pretty piss poor.

In any case this horse is ready for the glue factory. I can only demonstrate my rightness for so long before it gets tedious.

[[DAS REICH] Blitz]

i make it rain