Isn't it time we focus on what's really important?
Come on plebs, let's hear it.
Dumping some of my faves
A Wall® would fix this community's Bandito problem
>>72994960
this is my personal favorite
>>72995104
wow this is great
What's mrs.A cup size?
God I love these
>>72994717
I'll stick with being a bystander to avoid intent.
>>72994717
push the fatman.
kills the fat fuck.
kills the kike.
kills the kikes wife
what happens here /pol/?
>>72995064
The only correct answer.
>>72994717
Why doesn't the train just pull the brakes?
>>72996630
There are no brakes on this train.
>>72996679
That's quite impossible, having no brakes is a serious safety concern and they won't be allowed on the track.
>>72996630
that flag
>>72994717
Its never moral to sacrifice others regardless of the outcome.
Its only ever moral to sacrifice yourself.
>push someone else and kill them.
Why not jump yourself and die to save those 5 people?
>>72996994
this is you
>>72994960
>>72994717
I do nothing. I have no justification to commit murder in this circumstance.
>>72995776
You DO know where you stand in a scenario and you DO make a decision for someone else. It is only ever moral to sacrifice yourself. Everything else is immoral.
>>72994717
The only people in the political spectrum that actually have coherent and non-contradictory moral structures are basically people who base their morality as extensions of the NAP (Non Aggression Principle), this is broadly speaking libertarians, ancaps, anarchists and voluntrists.
When the NAP is your standard for morality you're not responsible for other peoples actions, and so non interference with the system would be morally neutral.
>>72997092
Your morality is inferior. Unless you jump yourself.
>>72997195
So if there was 800 people on the bottom track and only one on the top, you wouldnt switch the lever to the top? even if it meant saving all those 800 people?
>>72996050
i usually think I know what i'd do. I have no idea here though.
>>72997310
No I wouldn't interfere. Its immoral to make that decision for someone else. Even If I know society would judge me.
>>72994717
Neither, I go home and watch TV.
Yes, fuck fat people.
Where the fuck is the sick loop-de-loop
>>72997471
do you think you'd still feel that way if you and your family were on the bottom track? versus one guy on top.
You know I push him off.
>>72995104
this is the best one here.
>>72997686
Are we talking about morality or feelings?
>>72994717
What is the value of each individual to me?
Do I recognize Mr. A or anyone among the 5 innocent people? Is the fat man my friend?
I'm not about to reduce the quality of my life for the sake of others I do not know.
>>72997777
i hope me and my entire family arent one day stuck to a bottom track on an irish railroad.
>>72994717
You do not have a duty to rescue anyone, much less mitigate an incident you are not involved in, legally. The correct answer is to do nothing, because if you attempt to rescue them, you may be liable for damages resulting from the rescue, likely to include emotional distress.
>>72998052
So you cant answer if we are talking about morality or feelings?
>>72995104
Easy i would save the guy who cures cancer and save billions of lives.
o shit waddup!
>>72998127
>entire white race on the bottom track
>one nig on the top track
>BUT THIS ISNT MY RESPONSIBILITY WHO AM I TO INTERVENE HURR DURR
>pic related
Obviously...
Wait for him to pull the lever, killing the five, THEN push the fatty over, killing two, leaving only one left, who is already tied up and helpless.
Need I say more?
>>72994717
My family and genetic lineage outweighs that of a handful of others. My ancestors didn't toil for eons for me to cuck it all up with some faggoty selflessness.
>>72998136
I am still referring to morality. I think the moral thing to do is to save the most number of lives when given the choice, even assuming you know nothing about the lives at stake.
>>72996630
Only 26 people have posted on pol under that flag
>>72998369
In that case I would immorally save the white race. It would still be immoral though.
>>72998369
>Entire white race
Does that include you know who?
>>72998478
It is immoral to sacrifice other people. You can never make that choice for another human being. Its morally bankrupt.
Socially you might be expected to do it and if the numbers got high enough I would do it but it would still be morally wrong.
Do I know what morally is? Yes I think so. Do I always act morally no.
>>72994856
Holy shit that one is like the prisoners dilemma almost.
>>72998689
italians?
no
>>72997224
there's no such thing as moral neutrality. it's just an excuse for people who don't want to feel like dicks but don't want to make any sacrifices to be moral.
>>72998752
>high enough
What is that number?
>>72998478
But that requires initiating aggression against the people that die to save the others. You're appealing to consequentialism which is where the morality of the action is judged by the outcome, because people in general have competing and conflicting interests it means you can never resolve these unless the people you're sacrificing to save the many are themselves consenting to that act, which they most certainly will not be.
This >>72998127 is the only rational response, do not initiate any harm in the situation and remain morally neutral.
>>72994717
I let go of the lever and kill the two cuck's on the bridge for watching like two faggot's at a porno
OP you're missing my favorite one.
>>72998931
The point where it has much far reaching consequences than just the death of the people.
Personal fav
>>72994856
It's pretty easy - choose option that ensures my safety - that is doing nothing.
>>72996853
R A R E
A
R
E
>>72999078
Can you know those consequences from the outset?
>>72998394
Brilliant
>>72999048
You need to look up what hedonism actually means.
Its net pleasure minus pain. They tend to avoid over doing things. No hangovers etc.
>>72999217
Of course not which is why its best not to kill someone immorally.
>>72996994
>Its only ever moral to sacrifice yourself.
not pulling the lever is refusing to sacrifice your peace of mine. you're saying that your clean conscience is worth more than other people's lives.
>>72999241
I didn't make it. I also think you're a little too deep into the MS paint trolley problem scene.
>>72999302
Yet you change your stance the moment a number of people in consideration is "high enough".
What is that number?
>>72996050
Pull the lever and keep my eyes closed so it kills the people in both tracks A and B.
>>72999328
I am saying that its not your right to kill someone else "for the greater good". You are not equipped to morally decide what the greater good is and its 100% evil to volunteer other people for that sacrifice.
>>72997727
This was my first thought, are the people tied up, white?
>>72999409
You should still probably try to understand words you use.
>>72996050
It wouldn't matter whether you pulled it or not. The average amount of people being killed either way is 5.
>>72997296
Why is moral to murder yourself but immoral to murder another?
YOU KNOW NOT WHAT YOU HAVE BEGUN
>>72996853
what the fuck are you
Post the Stirner one
>>72994717
Pull the lever only halfway. By derailing the trolley, some will be hurt, but you have no way of knowing how many will be hurt and how badly. Now you have saved 6 lives and are not responsible for the unpredictable injuries of others.
No win situations do not exist.
>>72999445
I dont know. I consider it immoral to sacrifice someone else no matter what but I would probably do it at quite a low number just to avoid society hating me.
FOR THIS IS
>>72999556
this is true
>>72999472
unless you're a hermit it's impossible to live without sacrificing other people, if not their lives then some amount of their happiness. making up some system where you're never in the wrong is just being a coward to protect your own conscience.
>>72994717
YOU FUCKING IDIOTS YOU FORGOT THE WATERMARK
>push fat man so that he misses Mr A
>stab Mr A
>fuck Mrs A
>have 6 kids
These are amazing my sides have left orbit and are never coming back
epic thread
>>72994717
Let him pull the lever, push the fat man, she's the only one left alive to testify against me for the murder of the fat man and her husband. As she's clearly emotionally distraught, the case will get thrown out.
Maybe go for a revenge fuck.
>>72999763
I never claimed to be moral. I just know that its immoral to sacrifice other people like that.
>>72999690
i dont even know where to begin
No, because I don't give a shit about any of the people involved in the situation so why would I risk getting arrested for murder?
>>72999783
In this world memes are livelihoods.
We can't afford to squander our efforts any longer
>>72999536
Don't you have anything better to do with your minor in philosophy than pick apart an MS paint comic?
THE RECKONING
>>72999689
Who, or what, is this "society" of which you speak?
If this ever-judgmental society were upon the lower rails, and a person - who you value highly - upon the alternate path, which would you save?
>>72999328
>>72999328
>not pulling the lever is refusing to sacrifice your peace of mine. you're saying that your clean conscience is worth more than other people's lives
Again you're using consequentialism to try and judge the moral properties of the situation, rather than moral principles.
You did not initiate the trolly heading to kill these people so by any objective moral standard you have no responsibility in their deaths.
Trying to invoke moral assertions because of an undesireable outcome leads to self contradictory moral decisions, for morality to be even slightly useful it has to be logically coherent and non-contradictory. Yet the outcome of some people dying at your hands to others living has logically conflicting moral judgements using the standards of consequntialism.
None of the people on the tracks want to die, so by that same standard it's immoral to kill them and they lose their lives.
The only coherent moral solution is using the non aggression principle and understanding that intefering with the system is the initiation of aggression on whoever you decide dies, where as leaving the system alone leaves he moral responsibility on the person who set it up.
>>72999995
>Doesnt understand words in common use
>Misuses them
>Gets upset when corrected
Are you a shit skin?
>>72995906
IT'S HAPPENING
>>73000026
Are you asking what is moral or what I would do?
>>72999690
That's going to require a breadth first search
>>72994717
>>72994717
No. Not a moral argument just a personal one, don't get involved.
>>72999652
The Proxy King
>>73000106
I already told you I didn't make the fucking comic. Not being technically correct doesn't make it not funny.
>>72994717
Mr.A and Mrs.A confirmed straight hetero couple. They, and by extension their childern, live.
>>72994856
Not risking death for possible degenerates.
>>73000283
Ohhh. Tricky one.
I'd kill the jew though. Jew's ruin countries, niggers just ruin lives.
>>73000316
Fuck off retard. Dont respond to me anymore.
>>72995906
paradox... Socrates won't do shit.
The man answers "you will pull the lever"...socrates pulling the level would make the statement true (thereby making Socrates' declaration that he "won't pull the level if truth is spoken" false) If Socrates doesn't pull the lever. It would make the answer false...thereby making Socrate's statement that he would pull the lever "if spoken falsely) incorrect as well...
THe only possible answer is "You will not pull the lever"...
>>73000219
Does morality matter when the subject that imposes it upon you is up for consideration?
The question is plain: do you value morality or feelings?
>>73000103
>you are sitting in restaurant
>guy with gun stands up and starts blowing holes in random people
>you have a gun pointed at his head with finger on the trigger
>let him kill everyone in the restaurant because at least you're not interfering and that's the moral thing to do
if it hasnt been posted already
>>73000476
Do you have legit autism? Like for real, are you autistic?
>>73000103
the only logical moral principle is acting to produce the best possible outcome. claiming that you can not be involved is just hiding from responsibility.
>>72999241
Classical hedonism is not the modern definition of the word. Or do you get triggered when people talk about cynics and don't mean people running around naked, shitting in the street and fucking in public?
>>73000527
Okay so now we are forgetting about the train dilemma I take it? its just morality or feelings.
That is far to vague.
Can we keep it to the train dilemma and whether I would act morally or emotionally?
>>73000533
Nope, shoot to incapacitate or kill.
The NAP is the non initiation of force, you're allowed to respond/reciprocate to force in order to protect yourself, your property or as a proxy for other people to protect them.
Killing in this situation is morally justified under an objective moral system that the NAP provides.
I'd stay and watch the carnage then go to the pub and tell everyone about it
You have 2 options.
>>72994717
Kill 1 to save many. Easily!
>>73000579
Say that to your boss when he tells you that you have done something wrong. Come back here and post results.
>>73000676
That was the question.
If you don't value morality, you obviously wouldn't make the moral choice in any case.
Do you save the progenitor of morality itself, or do you save those for who you have feelings and recognition?
>>73000858
>as a proxy for other people to protect them.
how are the people in the restaurant any different from the people tied to the train tracks?
well pol?
>>73001021
You didn't answer the question.
>>72999454
Now that's an anon answer.
>>72994717
mr.A will have to live with what he did im getting the fuck out of here before cops show up and find my pot
>>73001062
Doing nothing is the moral choice. Saving the people you are emotionally attached to or pressured into saving is the emotional choice.
Isnt that obvious though?
>>73000609
>the only logical moral principle is acting to produce the best possible outcome.
That's logically incoherent because there's no global best outcome, people have conflicting interest in these circumstances and so it's impossible to resolve the morality of the situation based on consequantialism.
That's why consequentialists (most people) pain over the question so much because there is no satisfactory answer in that moral system
Only in a moral system which is logical coherent and universal (everyone agrees) can you come to satisfactory answers when judging the moral content. Which is why the NAP is superior.
You're not hiding from responsibility if you did not cause the situation to begin with, you're responsible for nothing. The person that set the experiment in motion is the one that's held morally responsible.
>>72994717
Which choice?
>>72999556
Yeah, the answer is either one is statistically equivalent. The right choice would be to not pull it to not involve yourself.
>>73000526
I don't think you've identified the agents in the image correctly. Socrates is tied up.
>>73001240
But is it moral if doing nothing results in the obliteration of everything that defines morality?
>>73001120
People with autism are known for their emotional outburst and inability to deal with social situations.
Doesnt that sound like you when someone points out that you used a word incorrectly? They arnt known for being able to recognize it in themselves so dont worry if you still feel angry at me.
You shoot yourself and let the train hit the group. High score right?
I have one.
Choice 1:You can mentally masturbate forever to these ridiculous scenarios.
or
Choice 2: You can go back in time and kill the murderous madman that invented the trolley.
The choice is yours.
>>73001065
>how are the people in the restaurant any different from the people tied to the train tracks?
In the train situation you're initiating violence against people by interfering and killing them. Those people had previously done nothing to pose a threat to you or anyone else.
In the shooting situation you're not initiating violence, you're reciprocating to violence to protect people which is allowed in the NAP.
>>73001103
Take the shot for the smaller target because it is morally superior to attempt to save all lives than to knowledgeably sacrifice one without consent especially when there is the option to try and save all 6.
>>73001103
Surely the trolley will only kill 5... This ain't multi track drifting situation.
The most moral option is to attempt to save everyone, even if you fail.
It's basically the plot of Interstellar.
>>73001377
That is a new condition you have entered into this. Those 5 people are clearly not all of morality. You and the person on track A still remain.
That person from track A will be happy. Happiness is not morality though.
>>73001251
it's disingenuous to claim that you aren't involved when your actions have a direct influence on the outcome. you've onstructed a moral system where all you have to do to never feel guilty is nothing. the world doesn't work that way.
>>72996630
This sneaky son of a bitch, though you were an aussie for a sec.
>>72996853
>>73001493
Shoot the single person, let the train hit the group. High score and Iive to tell the tale.
>>72994856
>>73000283
Kill the jew and leave the niggers tied up.
>>72994717
My action is only between murdering a fat man or not. Everything else is out of my control and I don't feel responsibility for it.
So my answer is that I wait for the situation to unfold and after the train passes by I still push the fat man anyway because he is going to become a burden on the taxpayers due to the welfare healthcare system.
>>72997471
yeah im sure you'll let all those women and children die, you sick irish negroid fuck.
you have the choice to save 800 people and you just let them all die. you know damn well what you're doing. you let them all die. 800. the obvious thing for anyone is to save the most.
heh just go fat and be the guy whos gonna jump on the railroad.
>>73001432
In other words yes he is autistic. He has posted over twenty times in one thread clearly has no social skills. He is not even correct about hedonism his definition is only epicurean
>>72994717
push fat piece of shit
>fat degenerate sack of shit dies
>faggot Mr A dies before he makes a choice leaving the train on a straight path by default
>get the chance to see 5 unknown faggots get killed by a train. chances are that 4 out of them were degenerates and liberals
>save Mrs A
>fuck Mrs A in the shitter on top of Mr A's corpse, cucking him from beyond the grave
>>72999536
Ireland is kinda based in this thread
>>73000179
Push the tripcode user off regardless of the presence of niggers or jews.
>>72999181
he is fucking PK
how new are you?
>>73001569
It's the same problem, just exaggerated.
What if they were 80 people? 800? 8 billion?
You said if the number is "high enough", you would act to divert a disaster for the sake of society's goodwill. You don't know that number.
What if that number was all of society? Would it matter if they judged you, would you care?
>>73001802
Sorry. Is the question what is moral or what I would do? Its immoral to act. I would act immorally and save them.
>>72998539
if you know the outcome, inaction is an action in itself. one of the choices you have. So you are on the immoral side, shithead.
>>72998349
>>72997727
>innocent people
>>73001432
>People with autism are known for their emotional outburst and inability to deal with social situations.
Like getting caught up in technicalities over a humorous MS paint comic on the internet and resorting to throwing insults for no real reason?
I think you might have of a touch of the 'tism my man.
>>73001923
Its immoral to demand that one person kills themselves to save the whole planet. Pretty admirable of them to do it voluntarily without pressure from anyone else.
Which is why Jesus is so looked up to. He knew he had to do it. Not that he was asked to do it.
I dont happen to be religious though.
Wait until he pulls the lever, then push the fat man over to kill them both, then rape the wife to death
>>73001696
You fucker
>>72994717
>kill 3 people or 4 people?
>>73001512
so according to you only victims of violence deserve to be saved, and in a scenario where the instigator is a natural disaster or something it would be immoral to save people.
MORAL GEAR SOLID
>>73002050
Stay mad sub human.
>>73001696
Is this loss?
In a legal and equitable sense the best course of action is inaction.
Unless I owe a duty of care to ensure the smallest number of casualties.
Furthermore if the five people die there is only one other party which may claim nervous shock and compensation for the actions that occured which is a better scenario for the operators of the trolley and myself.
>>73002006
this
if you know the outcome, it is your responsibility to prevent it
>out hiking with friend
>friend picks up poison berries
>i don't tell him they are poison
>he eats them
>he dies painfully
>i did nothing morally wrong
>>72995104
>one survivor becomes hitler
>a simultaneous survivor cures cancer
That's the easiest scenario yet.
>>73002222
Nice quads
>>73002006
I am choosing to believe that sacrificing someone else against their will is immoral. Would I act immorally to save a greater number of lives? Probably.
Would I act selfishly? Probably. I think morality is clear on this. I don't however claim to be moral.
>>73002165
Are you being triggered by the presence of the neurotypicals? Just fire up the hugbox and it'll all be alright.
>>73000533
That's a stupid example because the guy shooting everyone is basically the same as the trolley and you are saying you have a lever (gun) that could stop the trolley
>>72994717
I'll change the track and throw the fat man afterwards anyway.
>>73002313
Just stop replying already you miserable fool>>73002336
>>73000156
kek
>>72994717
This is a pretty elaborate setup just for Mr A to kill his wife.
>>72994717
It takes a beautiful mind to understand such things.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory
>>73001598
First of all i didn't construct it, the NAP has been around for a long time and there's many secular morality systems that are derived logically from it that define the boundaries of universally acceptable behaviour.
You're using sophistry to try and assign moral obligation onto people in that scenario to try and get the outcome you personally and emotionally think is best. No one is "involved" in the outcome of that system morally if they did not initiate the system.
The NAP isn't about what makes people feel guilty or good, it's about using logical to resolve moral conundrums and for that you need a logically coherent principle from which you can derive moral rules of acceptable behaviour. In this circumstance whoever set the trolly in motion and tied up people is morally responsible for the outcome.
The difference between our points of view is that mine is universal and is the same from any point of view, where as yours is contradictory, it depends who you are and what your interests are as to whether you'd evaluate the morality of the situation to be good or bad, if you're one of the people that's going to die at the hands of a person intervening they're certainly not going to agree that your actions to kill them to save others is moral.
Saying the world doesn't work that way isn't an argument for morality, you can't define morality as what people do is inherently good, nor can you define it as what makes you feel good, these are both self defeating positions they lead to paradoxical and logically incoherent judgement of the morality of actions.
>>73002268
No in that scenario you certainly did because you are just withholding beneficial information. You are not choosing who lives and dies. You are just choosing that people die.
That is a huge difference.
>>72995104
More things like this
>>73002268
>the poison berries are the trolley
>my knowledge and my language are the lever
Yes it's morally wrong because you are not killing anyone by sharing your knowledge
So silly examples
>>73002430
>>73002336
Lol stay mad nerds. I am enjoying thee discussion. You are getting upset.
>>73000106
>/pol/
>morality
Pick one fag.
>>72994717
this isn't important pleb.
>>72994856
Do nothing. Self preservation >>> potentially saving a slightly higher amount of people.
>>73002569
Here try this one.
>>73000239
kek, I'm tempted to come up with a traveling salesman trolley problem now
>>73002620
They don't understand the difference between what is moral, what is socially acceptable and what an individual might do despite knowing the difference.
They are probably teenagers.
>>73002721
You try this one.
>>73002151
>if you punch the enemy mecha you kill 5 people
>if you get punched by the enemy 5 people die
>punching the enemy mecha kills an additional 5 people he's wearing as armor
>kicking will only result in the deaths of 5 people on the enemy mecha but will leave you wide open and unstable
What do?
>>73002721
Anne's a bitch, but Sally will look in the basket first then the box.
>>73002824
You didn't answer the question.
>>73002910
Why are you so upset?
>>73002144
>so according to you only victims of violence deserve to be saved, and in a scenario where the instigator is a natural disaster or something it would be immoral to save people.
No the NAP allows for stopping violence as/before it occurs, if someone whips out a gun and threatens to shoot people that's seen as aggression and you can be justified in eliminating the threat.
If the instigator was a natural disaster then it's perfectly fine to save people, just not at the expense of killing other people who themselves have not instigated aggression.
The rule is quite simple if someone has initated aggression you can reciprocate, if they have you cannot.
Using the potential death of person(s) B as an excuse to kill person(s) A, when person(s) A have not initiated aggression makes the killing of person(s) A an immoral act.
And that standard is universal it means that it's not subjective, it doesn't depend on point of view or preference, because it's reasoned from objective principles.
>>72998689
No jews
And even if there were, saving the white race is more positive than killing the jews
>>73002910
I mean I just tried to help you use a word more correctly and your response is to accuse me of a mental disorder.
That isnt normal. Try to relax a bit.
>>73002910
Pretty sure he's that irish IP that's constantly trying to get white nations to fight each other.
>>73001103
Shoot the one person and let the trolley kill 5.
>>73002982
Come on man just answer it. I thought you liked these kinds of thing.
>>73003118
Do you feel retarded? Is that why you are so upset with me now?
>>73002721
She would look in the basket. It's the last place she put it. What's the catch?
>>73001713
I like you.
>>73002840
Fall back and take the pilot out with sniper fire.
>>73003012
They will never get it. For them its just the most basic interpretation of numbers.
>>73002766
You admit to being an immoral actor based on preference and quantity. You would actively violate what you consider moral if you felt the cost was too great.How can an immoral person know what is moral?
>>73000924
saved
>>73003191
It's an autism test for children.
>>72999999
>>72000000
>>72998786
That's the joke.
>>72994856
Doing nothing guarantees you survive and is easy to justify inaction.
>>73003186
I just wanted an answer to my question. You make being an internet psychologist really hard.
Pull it or not?
>>73003266
An immoral person can know what is and isnt moral because they can value things over being considered moral or not.
For example I know it would be immoral to kill you to save my family but I would still do that since I dont value you or the title of "moral human"
>>73003535
You make it easy for me. I think you are a child. Im guessing teens.
>>73003598
So morality was taught to you then?
>>73003677
why the fuck are they even arguing anymore, you're making perfect sense and they're just spewing shit since they're butthurt
>>73003058
He accused you of being autistic because you sound autistic as fuck, especially for a Paddy.
>>73003525
duh, shoot at the one that won't kill someone.
Duh.
>>72996630
>>72996853
fake. Those islands do not have internet. Nice proxy faggot
>>73003805
Its fun.
>>73003573
did you just construct this
>>73001103
Shoot the person and watch the trolley kill 5
>>72996853
damn dude you live on the most remote ass islands on urf
>>73003573
This would be tough if it wasn't Australia we're nuking. My sacrifice is not in vain.
>>72994717
I kill the five.
They're dumb enough to all get tied to train tracks. at least Mr. A turned up to maybe save his wife.
>>73003824
Having numerous retarded Americans disagreeing with you generally means you are doing something right.
>>73003805
>whitekinghting a autism
>>73003677
I don't think you can be a psychologist with autism. Empathy is kinda central to the job.
>>72996630
>Ultra-Rare posted
>Already have it
/flag/tism is both a blessing and a curse. Mostly a curse.
>>73004167
I'm not commenting on who is right or wrong, just pointing out that the way you type suggests some kind of mental disorder.
well, Mr. A seems to be the target of the terrorist operation. We don't want to kill the hero. People don't just set these scenarios up for no reason. So, I'd let Mr. A decide what to do.
>>73004175
>>73004200
>>73004322
You guys make it worthwhile.
Let's get serious /pol/.
>>73004167
The Trump strategy.
>the fall will kill the fat man
That's all I needed to read. I let Mr. A pull the lever and then I push the fatass. Afterward I go downstairs and fuck the shit out of Mrs. A (the A stands for ASS)
>>73003918
>>73004019
No shit it's a proxy, it's PK
>newfags detected
What is it?
>>73001103
Shoot the trolley
>>73004447
Lyin' Ted and Crooked Hillary are already dead
>>72994717
Stop him. Knowing nothing else about these people there's a better chance of rewards for saving 5 people than 1.
>>73003573
well you lose anyway.
so lets choose the bad ass option kill 100 children and nuke Australia.
Nobody give a shit about a few ISIS fucks in 50 years anyway, but someone who killed 100 children.. well that goes into the history books.
>>73003076
Top kek
>>73004447
I pull it. Trump can pay for another tower and all you faggots who worship the Tay bot are extremely autistic.
>>73004410
Glad to be of help, potatoe.
>>72998349
This one's real good. Lots of nice meme merging there. Good job leaf.
>>72998278
underrated
>>73004693
As expected of Austria.
