One of South Park’s most admirable qualities has long been its ambition. Not only does the show tackle current events at a rapid pace, and with remarkable candor, it’s also often at its best when it takes on multiple subjects, and draws connections between them that others would fail to notice. Consider season 21’s “Put It Down,” which mocked both Donald Trump’s chronic over-tweeting and Logic’s well-intended-but-preachy “1-800-273-8255” video. That said, there are times when the show gets a bit too ambitious for its own good, and just ends up being all over the place. This is the main problem with “Mexican Joker,” an often entertaining episode with quite a few enjoyable moments, but not enough structure to make a coherent point.
We begin at Tegridy Farms, where Randy’s business has grown considerably after being embraced as an essential replacement for Amazon last season. Randy becomes nervous, however, when he notices that sales have gone down. He quickly realizes the problem; his customers have left him in lieu of growing their own weed. Incensed, he leads Stan on a crusade to get homegrown weed banned, citing the risk it poses to children. This is a clear reference to the recently proposed ban on flavored vape juices, and as Randy joins forces with Big Weed to make the ban happen, the show makes the point that many others have made; regardless of the actual danger proposed, companies like Philip Morris only support the ban because it helps their bottom line. This sets up a plotline that could be followed throughout the season: Randy’s newfound lust for cash, has compromised the, ahem, integrity that inspired him to go into the business in the first place.
Back in South Park, Cartman sees an El Salvadorian family taken away and separated from each other by ICE agents and comes to the most Cartman conclusion possible: “Well, this is nice.” Observing how easy it is to place a call to ICE, he makes an anonymous threat against Kyle’s family, and the Broflovskis are separated as well. With Kyle as the only white kid in an ICE detention camp, the guards quickly realize something is off, and when they find out he’s Jewish, they release him, rationalizing that keeping a Jewish child in one of these facilities could look… racist. Here, South Park answers the “Is it okay to call them concentration camps?” question that flummoxed the likes of Chris Hayes this summer in a typically irreverent fashion. The show manages to address the horror of the situation without being excessively heavy-handed, an impressive feat considering how full of clapter Trump-era comedy has been.
As much as a lot of this works, problems arise when the ICE plot is taken further. In an attempt to get the ICE guards to realize the harm their cruelty could do, Kyle notes that all superhero film villains have tragic origin stories, and suggests that one of these children could one day vow revenge and become the titular Mexican Joker. In typical South Park fashion, the guards miss Kyle’s point entirely, doing everything from putting on puppet shows to performing dangerous shock therapies on children to prevent this from happening. This is where things get a bit tricky; the guards are rather casual about the vileness of their actions. What they’re doing is obviously wrong, but they don’t seem to act with much malice, with their ultimate goal just being to cover their asses. It’s difficult to say if we’re supposed to view them as virulent racists who firmly believe what they’re doing is the right thing, to the point where they’ve become numb to it, or if they truly believe they’re just Doing Their Job and haven’t considered the morality of the situation beyond that. Assuming the detention center will be making a return in future episodes, I’d like to see the guards’ motivations fleshed out a bit more.
The plots become connected when Randy’s paranoia over homegrown weed costing him his fortune makes him go insane, and he starts acting like, you guessed it, The Joker. Referencing The Dark Knight, Randy blows up every marijuana garden in town, re-establishing himself as the town’s only source. When the FBI gets wind of this, they naturally cast the blame on Kyle’s Mexican Joker archetype. Meanwhile, Kyle attempts to free all the children by converting them to Judaism, granting them the same immunity he has. It almost works, but in a confusing scene where the guards think they’re in a superhero film-style flashback, Kyle angrily tells them that the Mexican Joker doesn’t exist, so they assume they’re in the wrong flashback, and just leave the kids there. I get that this scene is trying to parody the flawed logic of these films, but it left us with an awkward, unsatisfying ending.
“Mexican Joker” has some good gags, and gets in some solid shots at the horror of Trump’s immigration policies, as well as the naked opportunism of Big Tobacco supporting the flavored vape ban. That being said, the episode ultimately tries to do too much at once, and feels awkward and disjointed. In previous serialized seasons, the show eased its way into each thread, often introducing them one episode at a time before resolving them all during the final stretch. Here, they already have enough going on to satisfy an entire season’s worth of storylines. Based on Trey and Matt’s history, we can be confident that they will ultimately provide satisfying answers to all the questions they’ve created. But in the case of this individual episode, it felt a bit rushed and unfinished. The best hope for “Mexican Joker” is that when all is said and done, it will look better in the context of a fully realized story.
Stray observations
- “I hate watchin’ babies drown! Seems like a waste of baby.”
- The theme song and opening are replaced with a new one centered around Tegridy Farms. I’m curious to see if they’ll use this all season.
- I’m glad to see we’ll get a second season of Tegridy Farms. With Randy’s dark turn here, I wonder if it’ll be a bit like the two-season-long Cartman-Heidi relationship, where a bright new development for a character is brought down by their worst tendencies.
409 Comments
the just doing their job concentration camp guards are the most dangerous, a pure distillation of the banality of evil.
That comment should get you permanent approval. I can’t believe Mr. Hugar didn’t get that part; it’s literally the subject of almost a hundred books about the rise of the Third Reich!
Though the “guards think they’re in a flashback” part might indeed deserve some criticism.
But yeah: “Do you know what we call Nazis who supported Hitler for economic reasons but found the race-baiting distasteful? We call them Nazis”, per
https://medium.com/delapierced/nazis-are-people-f1b999c4a1ce
This really is the point that the right has reached, and I’m pleasantly surprised Trey and Matt are still rowing against the tide since their Libertarianism probably has even less future under a President Warren than under a lifetime of King Donald.
But they definitely gored _my_ ox first and repeatedly before they realised what a monster the right had become, so I wasn’t watching this as it aired (though since we aren’t a Nielsen home, that doesn’t matter one way or the other). Not sure if I’ll change that policy yet or not.
Serious question, why didn’t we hear from you guys when this was going on under Obama?I can make a guess…….
Is your guess “because it wasn’t going on under Obama?”Because that’s the right answer, even though your propaganda has told you otherwise.
Dude take off your CNN goggles and put down the Rachel Maddow pipe….. You guys are literally dancing around like string puppets from the hands of main stream media. Good grief.A great primer on “baby jails” formed under Obama, from a progressive immigration lawyer. Yet none of you guys knew, or cared:
You literally posted a complaint from a progressive (your description, not mine) concerning Obama’s immigration policies. Nice own goal.
LOL this must be a hard concept. NOBODY was listening to these guys yelling at the top of their lungs about immigration issues. 99.99% of all of you could care less back then, including the media, because god forbid we criticize Obama. Then OVERNIGHT all of you were REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE about the border crisis, which was just as bad under obama. Just slightly less numbers, because more people started coming.
“99.99% of all of you could care less back then” – citation needed
HAHA OK let’s put it this way, how often did you see this before trump took office:Politicians rallying at border to protest (AOC)People calling for abolishing ICEPeople calling for open bordersPeople raging about babies being split up from their parentsPeople going REEEEEEEEE IT’S A CONCENTRATION CAMP!!!!!!!(Basically, none of that before trump)
I’m sure the guy who says “reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee” doesn’t have an ax to grind with Anti-Trump people…
Dude take off your Fox News blinders, you fucking idiot drone.
Let me guess, you also call CNN “communist news network” right?
LMFAO.There are fucking photographs of these camps being operated in much the same manner (kids in cages) back in 2014 during the Obama administration.
You know, the photos that the Dems tried to use to throw shade on Trump, before embarrassingly being informed that they in fact dated to King Barack’s reign, and then were hastily scrubbed from social media?
Too busy justifying bombing weddings, funerals, kids…Americans
Uhhhhhhhhh, people on the left did criticize Obama for this stuff. They called him the “Deporter-in-Chief”. Just because you weren’t paying attention doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.Also, it should be said that although the Obama administration did hold some kids in cages, those were unaccompanied minors who came here without their parents. I’m not trying to justify those actions, but it’s a far cry from Trump’s policy of deliberately separating families and trying to detain them indefinitely.
Wow. Try a little education.
You may have a point about centrist liberals (who I often argued with around that time). But the tweet you posted, and more so some of the statements later in that tweet thread, would seem to defeat your overall point here. Immigration groups, lawyers, left activists, regular left citizens, etc absolutely WERE criticizing Obama for this. There’s a reason “deporter in chief” became his moniker to a lot of people. And it wasn’t conservatives driving that nickname, either. Nor, I imagine, will pressure from conservatives ever drive the topic of Obama’s (or Trump’s) deportations into the primary debates, as pressure from the left has already done a few times now with the Democratic debates, one of which concluded with protesters interrupting Joe Biden about precisely that issue.
The biggest reason Trump has grabbed more attention is that he is, genuinely, even worse on this than Obama was. Obama was no picnic and he deserves every bit of shame he’s getting for the reins he handed off to Trump – but it’s still been fully Trump’s decision to decide to top the Obama administration’s viciousness in every conceivable way.
True. Trump is 10x worse
You are a well programed right wing bot.
In addition, I never heard or read of more than a few people complain about. I would be shocked if the subject got 1% of the complaints, focus, and press that it does today. The american public is soooo manipulated one these social issues it’s mind boggling. It’s sad that more people take a step back and ask why.
Again, just because you never heard or read complaints doesn’t mean they didn’t exist.
What’s funny is he’s, if anything, showing a post about Obama stopping it even if it’s true.
LOLOLOL did you even read the guy’s tweets? This BS started under OBAMA. Good lord some of you are blinded by bias.And to make it all worse, the situation was cranked up to 11 by trump.
Cool story.
You are full of shit and stupid to boot. Fuck off and educate yourself, shit wit.
It’s funny you mock people for being manipulated and not opening your eyes, while apparently ignoring all of the criticisms that were made about Obama during that time.“WAKE UP SHEEPLE! OPEN YOUR EYES!”*says the man with a blindfold on*
Cause it wasn’t.
Obama was a massive piece of shit on this issue (among others), but that doesn’t exactly exonerate Trump, who has graduated Obama’s everyday villainy into cartoonish super villainy.
Can’t stand trump and not saying this should exonerate him. He ratcheted it up and bragged about it. Point being that 99% of all americans currently upset about this subject were hypocritically QUIET when it was happening during Obama’s admin.
I’ll admit I didn’t know about Obama’s deportation policies, but that’s also probably because Obama didn’t tweet and brag about every policy he made. Trump creates his own shit storms
Imagine being this dumb.
Because under Obama people were not dying on a daily basis.
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/4/4/immigration-advocatespressureobamaondeportations.html
you just didnt hear from it from cnn, msnbc, fox, etc.
It’s difficult to say if we’re supposed to view them as virulent racists who firmly believe what they’re doing is the right thing, to the point where they’ve become numb to it, or if they truly believe they’re just Doing Their Job and haven’t considered the morality of the situation beyond that.This is SP holding the mirror up. Most of the actual guards aren’t virulent racists, they’re contract workers who believe they’re just doing their job to keep food on their table. The old cliché “the banality of evil” comes to mind.
Maybe not virulent racists, but the median is at least a solid percentage more racist than non-ICE Americans, which is pretty fucking racist.
I find myself unable to disagree with this statement. More racist than me, because I wouldn’t be able to do it.
Do alittle research and see what ice really does. They stop drugs from coming over the border, stop children from being used for prostitution, keep people from stealing social security numbers and working here illegally, battle ms13 gangs which take up over 30 percent of prisons space in border states, and of course enforce our laws against illegal immigration which were in effect way before Trump was president.
Yeah, they def just arent “putting food on the table.” That is a very specific job to be doing to put food on the table. You could just be a cop (but please dont be one of those “I couldn’t get into the Marines so this is my plan B” cops), national guard, really anything.You chose ICE and you remain there doing that job because you believe in it.
This being the internet – and a comment section – I am used to believing a claim with no backing evidence. Now, however, I am faced with conflicting claims with no backing evidence so the only choice I have is to believe whichever claim fits my current outrage target.
You do know most ICE employees are of latin origin or like my family Asian-American whos fluent in spanish, aka Filipino.
Yes, the industry that is largely hispanic just hates Mexicans
The Nuremberg Defense is and always will be horseshit.
I thought about mentioning that in my comment, I wish I would have. I think that’s the general direction they’re going with this, I hope they land it hard.
You hope they land it hard? What it is it with people now where they feel a joke has to be over explained and beaten to death like a dead baby drowned in a homemade irrigation system?
I hope they go in the direction where ICE starts affecting white people the same and THEN they realize it was wrong. Sort of like the “First They Came For…” poem.
You did mention it though, just not in those words. It was literally nothing other than that. “Just following orders” is what the whole term boils down to and that’s the argument you made for them.
🕳️💯eh sea rl you c you soon with the Jewish Federation for my birthday present to me and an mine and late son. Wasn’t horseshit ice ! But you’ll taste it. Branch ! Doh protectors
huh?
Do you smell toast?
These Guards aren’t killing kids.
It may not be a valid defense, but it goes a long way toward explaining how stuff like this happens without having to resort to “I guess all those millions of people who joined the Nazi party were just all irredeemably horrible and we don’t need to think about this any further.”
the banality of evil sounds like a badass candlemass album
You get a 🌟 just for knowing who candlemass is.
or a very mean banana.
I think it’s almost certainly “doing their jobs”, it’s a direct connection to the rank and file Nazi Germany SS soldiers who were willing to commit atrocities for fear of being disgraced or killed for refusing.
Most of the actual guards aren’t virulent racists,
Recently, thousands of border patrol agents, including the chief of the entire agency, were revealed to be part of a white supremacist Facebook group where they joked about killing migrant children and raping women, among other things.But, you know, let’s just make excuses for them because, um, some of them have kids, I guess?
Humour groups.I’m in some pretty offensive groups myself that posted funny shit.Not outright KKK shit, but some meme groups have jokes of all types.It’s pretty easy for an angry journalist with an agenda to twist that as much as he pleases.
Humour groups.
I’m not making excuses for them, I’m saying that most of them aren’t virulent, although obviously too many are. There’s 68k people in the border patrol, most of them just work there. That doesn’t make what they do right, it means that ordinary people who do not think of themselves as racist can be copied into a racist system without realizing it, which is where I hope the SP story is going.
DOn’t tell that to the Journalists/commentators here, that defies their little world full of virulent racists that they’ve created.
Step outside your predominantly white suburban neighbor and social circle. But maybe you wouldn’t be able to handle the microaggressions POC face everyday.
100% agree.. I think the author kinda missed the point here. Life isn’t black and white. There’s a middle ground between the two types mentioned by the author, and that’s where most people are.
Working at a child concentration camp isn’t a middle ground. That’s the evil side, even if you have a family to support. Having financial needs isn’t actually a moral argument!
Life isn’t black and white.
Some things are. “Should I work at a concentration camp?” is one of those black & white things.
You’re using really oversimplified logic. So that situation is bad so no one should work there…. So no one should enforce immigration because things are how they are…. So we should have open borders since we don’t have anyone to enforce law. Your comment goes well with the newly woke crowd, but your argument is dumb.
you’re not going to destroy the concentration camps by calling the
people that work there racist. the only way to destroy them is mass
mobilization to create fair working conditions for everyone, including
immigrants, which WONT include an open borders policy that would destroy
any meaningful advancement for the working class. but go ahead and feel
like you’re better than these workers because that’s all your politics
does: make you feel like you’re better than other people.(btw a demilitarized border is NOT an open borders policy, and is the correct policy moving forward)
Wouldn’t really consider that a cliche. >_<
Agreed. I find that the virulent racists are the FANS of ICE. Which is such a sad statement that I think I felt myself become clinically pressed after typing it.
I sorta lean agree here but I think the number is probably larger than you think. Some investigative journalists have turned up internal emails and discussions among the guards and agents and quite a few of them have troubling views. Some are of the racist variety, some are of the negativity that comes with that institutionalization can breed when you view detainees as less than human.
There’s probably a lot of people who go into the job relatively unprejudiced as far as white Americans go but get sucked into a job culture fueled by evangelical racists and the institutional dehumanization you mentioned. They hear racist stereotypes, then observe those stereotypes among their prisoners and assume the stereotypes are true without realizing how their actions and systems make it a self-fulfilling prophecy.
A good representation of this is in the book Spring by Ali Smith. She talked to many people who work in immigrant detention centers and found that the system itself encourages people to view detainees as subhuman. In the detention center she depicts (closely based off a real detention center), employees are encouraged to refer to immigrants as “deets” instead of people (“deet” short for detainee), discuss “processing” and “rejecting” the “deets,” and not to talk for too long or get too attached to any of the people being detained (it’s considered unprofessional). Do that for years, and you start thinking of immigrants as objects to be processed. It’s scary.
This. Exactly. 100%.
Most of the actual guards aren’t virulent racists, they’re contract workers who believe they’re just doing their job to keep food on their table.I feel like the guards in the holocaust camps would appreciate you being sympathetic to them. So you also believe that those who voted for the 45th president aren’t racist? Just like hell, there are different levels of racism, dude.
Most of the actual guards aren’t virulent racists, they’re contract workers who believe they’re just doing their job to keep food on their table.
No, they’re racist pieces of shit for working there. They could choose to leave & work somewhere else, but they don’t.I really don’t give a shit what their reasons for working there are. They’re all bullshit.
It’s valuable to examine their motivations and thought processes as an explanation rather than an excuse. If the current madness passes without some catastrophic breakdown of the existing order we’re going to have to deal with these people as fellow citizens for some time. Understanding them will help us figure out what reaches these people and hopefully give us clues as to how to inoculate them against future attempts to use their weaknesses as a weapon against the state.Knowing your enemy doesn’t have to mean showing sympathy for them.
It’s valuable to examine their motivations and thought processes as an explanation rather than an excuse.
No, it really isn’t. You’re either ok with locking kids in cages or you’re not.
Knowing your enemy doesn’t have to mean showing sympathy for them.
I know them already. Power over others is what they crave. That’s why they seek out these types of jobs.
FYI, TheGCU
is an identified troll on Gizmodo, don’t engage with it in good faith. https://splinternews.com/1838494025
https://splinternews.com/1838503311
https://splinternews.com/1838492169
Thanks. I don’t even know if troll is the right word, trolls seem to have enough imagination to bullshit their way through being wrong rather than delete everything.
Personally I think the “I was just doing my job” excuse one of the worst excuses to ever exist. Right up there with “But he started it!”. Childish and utter bullshit.I’d rather be labeled a virulent racist than some asshole who’s “just doing his job”. A racist at least has an opinion of their own. They’ve given some thought to the torture they put people through. They’re making a stand. We can at least give them that.Just doing your job, huh, buddy? Fuck you and everything you stand for. That’s the worst kind of human being we can possibly breed on this planet. Someone else wants you to fuck up some stranger’s entire life and you just fucking do it? What’s their paycheck like anyway? These are the people who are literally to fucking dumb to even be racists.How much would you charge to fuck up some random person’s entire life? Or even a whole family, fucking up several generation’s lives? It damn well better be in the 8 figures.I wish someone told these guys that their job was to jump off a fucking sky scraper and we’d be rid of these mush brained fuckers unable to form an opinion and/or act upon it. There’s no excuse in world good enough to hang on to that job. They. Are. All. Racist. Bigoted. Dicks. End. Of. “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” There are no good men to triumph over evil in that system. The good men never applied for the job in the first place. If you’re one of those guards and you want to argue the case, fucking prove it. Quit that shit job today and line up outside Home Depot for work. You’ll get food on your table. They managed it before you put them in a concentration deportation camp.
True, the real evil ones are the shit parents who decide to break into another country with their kids.
Oh no…we’re past the point of sympathy with this…
Did you listen to the undercover tapes?
The guards are laughing, LAUGHING AT CHILDREN AS THEY CRY OUT IN PAIN.
A racist system that is elevated and supported by none racists? Nope.
Since when did Trey and Matt become the new Rod Serling?
This isn’t necessarily what people are going to want to discuss the most when talking about this episode but, seriously, the vaping ban is absolute fucking horseshit and is a rather transparent example of the government being bought off by big tobacco. All of the people who died were vaping some kind of dodgy THC mixture, as opposed to nic salts, and scientists do actually know THE EXACT CHEMICAL THAT CAUSED THE ILLNESS (i.e. Vitamin E acetate). But no, instead of simply banning that one ingredient, we’re going to outright ban something that has got millions to quit smoking, a far deadlier habit, because reasons. Oh and as for ‘the kids’… Just ban selling them to minors? It’s really not that hard.
Agrer 💯% w you on this subject. I don’t vape but I have and I love the flavors. That’s the appeal of vaping. The different flavors keep it new unlike just allowing tabacco flavored juice only. I am a smoke and was considering vaping as an alternative in order to quit soon but now once again big tabacco is stealing another way to keep me from walking away. I’ve tried everything else but vaping seemed the best and when i had tried it in tthe past i had basically gone from a pack a day to a pack every couple days. Banning the flavors and not just banning the particular products that contain the thing thats making people sick and die is absolutely showing the way our govt thinks about money lining thier pockets and lobbyists are really running our country
Preach! Vaping is a delivery system , if you put poison in it , you get poisoned. These vape carts are like bathtub gin.
I love watching nicotine addicts go all “second amendment” about their juice rigs.
The Governor of Massachusetts just instituted an instant “emergency temporary” (4 months) ban of over-the-counter sales of vaping oils and equipment. Health departments were going to stores and having their clerks literally sweeping products off the shelves and out of the cases. For the stores that are vape-only, unless their owners are sitting on large wads of cash (and assuming the ban doesn’t turn permanent), that’s it – they’re going down. One of the most pernicious phrases against freedom is, “Think of the children!”
I just had a rant about this at lunch yesterday!The republican top of MA just did the most LEFTIST AYN RAND SOCIALIST MARKET STUPID MOVE.And it was totally self inflicted he could have hidden behind the 4-5 EEE deaths this year to say there were bigger issues.
One of the most pernicious phrases against freedom is, “Think of the children!”
Absolutely.As a gun owner and avid supporter of the Second Amendment, I couldn’t agree more. Thanks for your support.
As a gun owner and avid supporter of the Second Amendment
Your reply to me apparently got Kinja’d, so I’ll reply here.
I never said anything about the “sole purpose” of guns, or what people use them for currently. I was only referring to the original intended purpose for the creation of firearms, and I’m pretty sure… wait, let me check… yeah, it was NOT for shooting at paper targets. By way of contrast, automobiles were created to make it easier for people to travel. They weren’t made for running over people. Yet we regulate them very strictly. And that’s my point. Arguing that we shouldn’t ban guns because we don’t ban cars is a TERRIBLE argument. Outside of a ban, ownership and use of a car is regulated far more severely than any gun rights advocate would agree to in regards to firearms. Saying that guns shouldn’t be regulated while also referring to cars causing deaths is simply a horrible example and anyone using it should be sent to debating school.
That all being said, I’m not even anti-gun. I’ve shot plenty of guns at ranges and have numerous hunting relatives. My grandfather and son were and are U.S. Marines. I wouldn’t even be opposed to owning one someday.
I’m also against a gun ban.
At the same time, I support stronger regulation. There is nothing in the 2nd Amendment that precludes the government from regulating firearms. I firmly believe the founding fathers didn’t intend for a free-for-all. Even the first amendment has conditions.
You and I would probably disagree on that, but that’s OK. That doesn’t make you or I a bad person.
There’s also nothing in the Bill of Rights that guarantees citizens the Right to Keep and Bear Cars, so there’s that difference as well.
And yet everyone is going to get their stuff from the black market, where it’s not well regulated and shady.Sort of like drugs and guns….
It’s already banned from being sold to minors?
Yes, of course, but hysteria requires more laws to be forced upon you.
And has been said elsewhere – one kid dies from vaping and there’s a national ban. Thousands dies from gunshots…….
More people die from sharp instruments or blunt force trauma from things like baseball bats and hammers than guns. So what’s your point?
Yeah man. I mean, we really need to do something about those hammer wielding maniacs killing 15+ people in broad daylight at a school!
His point, moron, is they’re effectively putting a ban on vapes.
That isn’t true.Across the country about 1/3 of traumatic deaths are gunshots, 1/3 are car accidents and 1/3 are falls.Source : NTDB data
You are a very very stupid person.
FALSE.Other methods kill more than rifles specifically, but handguns dwarf everything. Get your sniveling excuses right, at least.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-4.xls
In 2017, 3/4 of all murders in the US involved a firearm. About 1/2 half of all suicides involved a gun. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/16/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
What’s the utility for guns in a city? Lots of blunt instruments and knives have utility outside of hurting people or animals. Guns do not in anything but a rural setting.That’s the point. Stop being obtuse.
Oh. Hi, Neil.Ah, yes, I remember the last mass murderers used baseball bats and hammers to kill 12 and 20+ people, respectively.
More people are murdered with blunt instruments like hammers than with rifles. Guns in general, and handguns in particular, are still the king when it comes to homicide. I agree that bans are futile/counterproductive, but it’s also important to keep the facts straight.
Wow you really are thick if you can’t see his/her point. Gun nut detected!
While that is a great point, if vaping was in the constitution, it would have been a lot more difficult to do anything.
Gun ownership isn’t in the Constitution, the right to levy a draft/raise a militia is. In an era before the concept I’m f standing armies, farmers brought food, equipment, and guns from home when conscripted to defend “their” lands. The 2nd amendment is obsolete, a relic of a bygone era. The interpretation you *think* is the 2nd amendment is the result of intensive lobbying by the NRA during the past half-century. I like guns, I’ve been around them most of my life, I’ve owned several over the years, and I served in the military. I’m not anti-gun, I’m pro fact. #2 was never meant to be anything more than a statement that a free state (nation, not state in the USA context) can’t exist if some other state (again country, i.e. Britain) could just sail over here with their army and take over again. The need for a trained and regulated (key words) militia, therefore, was codified in the Constitution. That stipulation has been met by national guards in every state, 4 branches of military service, the coast guard, and the largest defense budget on the planet. We don’t “need” private ownership to satisfy the Constitution, we “need” it to satisfy our inherent fear of tyranny, even while promoting the tyranny of unrestricted capitalism ahead of the needs of the people it seems.
Hundreds of thousands of people die each year from obesity/heart disease and people could give two shits about it. We are actually skinny shaming these days and trying to normalize unhealthy lifestyles. Its not about the people, its about getting the people to vote a certain way. Once you realize that both sides play this stupid game and dont actually care about you, you will be in a much happier place (not you specifically but people in general).
how about car crashes There are nearly 40,000 fatal car accidents per year in the U.S.Each day, more than 90 Americans die in car accidents.
And we have frillions of laws related to car and traffic safety. What’s your point?
And we have a shit ton of laws regulating guns. What’s your point?
You are a very very stupid person.
Exactly. And I need a license to drive a car. And I need to be tested to see if I can use one properly before I can receive said license. And every car I own needs to be registered with the government. I need insurance to protect people or property that may be injured by the improper use of my car. The government keeps a record of everything I’ve ever done wrong with my car. In many states, I can’t even drive a car that the government has deemed unsafe.
So yeah, the two things should totally be treated the same.
Cars weren’t created for the sole purpose of killing. But by all means, keep using that argument. It’s fabulous.
This is the correct answer.
Guns weren’t created for the sole purpose of killing. I own dozens, and despite the fact that I use them frequently, none of them has ever killed anything. But by all means, keep using that argument. It’s fabulous.
Yep, and cars are also necessary for a lot of things that drive our economy and lives. Are vaping and guns necessary? Remember, “I like guns” is not necessity.
Yawn, yes let’s bring out all the usual fallacies… “Whataboutery” being a classic one beloved of many a moron…
True, though car crash deaths have been holding steady as the number of drivers has doubled (and more) over the past few decades. In other words, deaths per capita have decreased. Likewise, violent crime overall is decreasing. Which is why MOST Democrats, and not just the kind you hear about on Fox “news,” support common-sense approaches like registering weapons, banning private sales (which can be made without background checks currently), and a pre-check system like Illinois’ FOID card. Governing a nation is really, really hard when it’s actually more like 50 nations that kind of get along sometimes.
And your point is?
Correct me if I’m wrong but nobody is using vape juice for self-protection?
The vaping ban has strong parallels to the gun control debate. A statistically tiny number of people illegally misuse something, people die, and then there’s sweeping bans.The difference is, vaping isn’t protected by the constitution.
May want to check your assertions. The Supreme court has stated that assault weapons are NOT protected under the 2nd amendment. There’s also that pesky mention of the first words in the amendment… “well-regulated militia” that gun nuts ignore. Unless you’re in a “well-regulated militia” , then the 2nd amendment doesn’t apply to you. Reading comprehension.
Oh, look…another anti-gun nut who knows fuck-all about what the SCOTUS has said about gun ownership and doesn’t understand the Second Amendment with more than a grade-school level of reading comprehension.How refreshing. Next you’ll be breathlessly telling everyone that the AR in AR-15 stands for Assault Rifle, and the weapon can shoot 1000 rounds a second or some such ignorant nonsense.
Citation on the Supreme Court stating at assault weapons are not protected under the 2nd amendment? And what constitutes an assault weapon, anyways? Pistol grip? Magazine capacity? How scary the gun looks? Please tell me.And to your 2nd point, the amendment reads “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”The authors of the constitution and the bill of rights were not sloppy in their writing. It could be argued that they were referring to the right of the militia to keep and bear arms. But, myself and many (many, many, many…) others don’t agree. If they intended to say “the right of militia members”, they very likely would have written it that way.It says “the right of the people”; key word being “people”, and not “militia”. “People” in the context of the constitution and bill of rights meaning United States citizens.
That’s because in 178x whichever year the Constitution was drafted there was no standing army. The “militia” was just volunteers who met up and drilled together. They brought their “uniforms” and weapons from home. The 2nd amendment has been obsolete since the civil war.
Good thing nobody asked your opinion on what you believe, or how you “interpret” something that sounds like exactly what you want, and is not supported in the text at all.
“Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protections to weapons of war,” Judge Robert King wrote for the court, adding that the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller explicitly excluded such coverage.
“Many many people” also believe in an imaginary sky-daddy as well. that doesn’t mean I have to cede anything to people that lack reading comprehension and have no connection to objective reality.
There’s A LOT of stupid people out there,that doesn’t mean that people should say “oh well a lot of people are saying this, so we should listen to them”.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/assault-weapons-not-protected-second-amendment-federal-appeals-court-rules-n724106
Hoo boy, you’re special, aren’t ya? The article you linked, and the quote you used, is from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Not the Supreme Court.Furthermore, the article you linked mentions the case of District of Columbia v. Heller. In this case, the Supreme Court actually ruled that the 2nd amendment does in fact grant the right to bear arms to the individual, not only a “well regulated militia”.So, no, no one asked me my opinion. But, they did ask the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court interprets the 2nd amendment to grant the right to bear arms to everyone! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Hellertl;dr The Supreme Court DID NOT the 2nd amendment doesn’t include “assault weapons”. The Supreme Court DID say that the 2nd amendment applies to everyone, not just militias. You’re wrong two times.I strongly look forward to you not replying to this. Have a good one!
The US Constitution is one of the biggest political jokes ever played on poor, gullible humankind.
It’s not tiny and lack of regulation of guns has a significant impact on deaths.
There are roughly 16,000 murders by gun in the USA every year. This includes justified killings (self defense, cops shooting criminals, etc.). But, let’s pretend that all of the 16,000 murders are guns being illegally used.16,000 murders, in a country with a population of 329,064,917.16,000/329,064,917 = 0.000048%
0.000048% of people died because of the illegal use of guns.I’d call that statistically tiny.
(1) Your math is wrong. It’s 0.oo48%(2) You are ignoring suicides.(3) Most police do not report the number of killings they commit every year and they often justify unjustified killings,(4) The sole purpose of a gun is to kill. Unlike other causes of death, there is no other utility for a gun. Therefore, I would submit that 16000 deaths is a significant number.
1.) Yes my mistake. But, 0.0048% is not even a rounding error. It’s literally by the book not statistically significant.2.) Let’s say we could snap our fingers Thanos style and make all guns disappear. You, nor me, can predict the impact that would have on suicides. Suicide is not a gun problem.3.) Citation? The police can’t just not report a killing… wat4.) Correct. But, killing is not always a bad thing. The ability to kill is not a bad thing. Some people need killed, and others need the fear of death to stop them from hurting someone else. Please google the estimations of how many crimes firearms stop or prevent each year. Spoiler: somewhere between 55,000 (low end estimate) to 4.7 million (high end estimate). Guns are designed to kill people. Killing bad people (or the ability to do so) keeps us safe.5.) Take a guess how many of the 16,000 non-suicides are a result of inner city gang violence? Let’s not pretend that all of the 16,000 are innocent bystanders. A LOT of them are mixed up in the world of crime to begin with.
(3) It’s well-known that police are not required to keep track of police shootings. Because you asked for a citation https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/09/08/how-many-police-shootings-a-year-no-one-knows/
(5) So the victims deserve it. OK. Now I know where you stand.
Okay, so there’s no national database on police shootings. You know what is documented? When the body goes to the morgue and the cause of death is determined. At which point, it will be reported as a death by gunshot wound.I’m not going to dive into the weeds of who does and doesn’t deserve to die. I’m not a big proponent of death being the answer to almost anything, unless someone is defending their own life.What I’m saying is, I don’t lose sleep at night because there’s people in the world who choose to involve themselves with criminals, participate in criminal activity, and lose their lives because of it. Is it sad? Sure is. But I don’t think it’s unjust. Unless we get into the greater picture of systematic oppression and this leading to particular demographics being more inclined to live that lifestyle, etc. But, again, that’s not a gun problem. That’s a society problem.Furthermore, let’s say we banned all guns tomorrow. What’s your vision for criminals giving up their guns? Because I can tell you for certain, it’s already illegal for a huge number of them to own guns as it is now. And they continue to do so.In my county in particular, there’s multiple-time repeat offenders. A felon gets caught with a gun, he is punished, he’s caught again, he’s punished. On and on and on.We already have good laws on the books. But, they’re loosely and poorly enforced. And THIS results in lives lost. We should focus on that before we start violating the rights of law abiding citizens. Do you disagree?
Where did I say “ban all guns”? As long as we have universal background checks, universal registration requirements, and certified training required for each class of weapon I would be fine. Nearly all illegal guns start out as legal guns. Somewhere an illegal gun gets diverted from the legal chain of custody. Many of the guns used in crimes originate from a very small number of gun shops and those shops should be policed and held liable for negligence if not outright criminality. Registration should be required for 100% of transfers. If not, the last legal owner is going to have to answer a lot of questions if they did not report it stolen or missing.
You didn’t, I was just using the extreme end of the spectrum to illustrate a point.And sure, you make a fair point here. It would make tracing the chain of custody easier if registration was required for all transfers, of course.A good example of implementation of this would be Washington D.C. They require registration of all transfers of any firearm, as I understand it. They do not permit “assault weapons” at all. They have a 10 round magazine capacity limit. They have a waiting period law. But, the murder rate there remains among the highest in the county. In the early 90’s, D.C. was known as the “murder capital” of the country. And their total violent crime ranks much much higher.Chicago is also a very well known high gun crime city. They have some of the strictest gun laws and restrictions in the country.So, explain to me how more gun laws will help? The existing ones do not work, even the ones that you’re proposing. They are implemented in cities across the country, and they don’t work. Why?We are not Australia, we are not the UK. Our country was founded on certain principals, our culture is totally different, our physical landscape is different, our borders are different.Again, I’ll use the extreme example. Let’s say you ban all gun sales in the US. You don’t think that would just create a thriving black market gun trade economy from Mexico into the US? Just like with all the drugs that are 100% illegal yet still make it to every state in the country in massive quantities?I want to save lives. Lives are important. But I am not okay with my rights being infringed to *maybe* save some percentage of 16,000 lives. Because I don’t believe it will work. I think it will always be easy enough to get a gun in this country if you want one. Even if we ban all sales and have a mandatory buyback. I truly believe even then, you’d be able to get a gun as easily as you’d be able to get cocaine.
Because DC and Chicago aren’t islands in the Pacific? The laws need to be federal to have real teeth.
Did you read my entire reply? I understand if you didn’t, it’s a long one. But, I addressed that point.tl;dr The USA is not an island in the Pacific either. There are already staggeringly large illegal trade routes from Mexico into the US. If we ban gun sales in the US tomorrow, we would just have an influx of illegal guns from Mexico the following day. Heroin is federally illegal. There’s still tons of heroin in every city in the US. How do you think it gets there? We cannot stop people who want guns from getting guns, just like we can’t stop people who want heroin from getting heroin.
Even more from auto accidents, drunk driving! Ban the cars!
Irrelevant.
Yeah…that made perfect sense. So where in the constitution does it have “the right to bear vapes”? Look I agree vapes shouldn’t be banned but your reasoning is completely flawed. Vapes can’t be used in self defense or to stand up against a tyrannical government with.
And tens of thousands from abortion. Car crashes. Suicide.
“But muh amendment! The govment need to protect me to own the guns for when the govment comes to take muh guns!Also I need to store them in this open hall closet for quick access by my incel asshole son who blames his own stupidity on everyone but himself….in case the govment comes to take muh guns.”
And millions from cigarettes.
With perfectly sardonic, appropriate intellect: I reply, DEAD RIGHT! 🤟
a couple of kids die from smoking black market pods from China. So Massachusetts puts a ban on the legal Juul pods. Which leaves exactly one option if you want to keep vaping which is the black market pods from China. So…good job Massachusetts?
all smoking should be banned – cigarettes, cigars, pot, vaps, high pollution trucks, cars, manufacturing plants, etc.
Glad someone finally said it. Its complete horseshit. I think vaping is stupid as hell but people should be allowed to do it if they want.
counter point: vaping is stupid & annoying.
Big tobacco and big vape is one and the same. Juul, by far the biggest brand is owned by Altrium (formerly Philip Morris).
Big tobacco and big vape is one and the same.
Citation needed.
Juul, by far the biggest brand is owned by Altrium (formerly Philip Morris).
No, Altria has a 35% stake in Juul. That’s not ownership. And Philip Morris & Altria are separate companies.
Yeah. It’s actually a bit odd that people don’t understand that the vaping industry is mostly a part of the same tobacco industry.
Devil’s advocate: Nobody knows the long-term effects of vaping yet because nobody has done long-term studies on it. There is anecdotal evidence that inhaling anything artificial into your lungs long-term causes serious health problems (in fact, that is one of the concerns about inhalable insulin, a delivery system that has clear benefits over injections – the FDA is concerned that particulate buildup in the lungs will ultimately result in long-term and irreversible damage).Also, vaping products are more addictive than tobacco products because they contain, on average, more than twice the amount of nicotine.I always thought sucking lollipops would be the best way to satiate the oral fixation, but of course then you’d have to contend with Big Sugar. /s
“Also, vaping products are more addictive than tobacco products because they contain, on average, more than twice the amount of nicotine.”This is misleading. While (some) vape products contain more nicotine, the method of delivery is not as efficient. Burning a tobacco leaf and inhaling it delivers more nicotine into your blood stream than inhaling the vapor. Its the reason why pod devices have higher nic levels than open systems like tanks, and why those systems have higher nic levels than drippers. Generally, pod devices are low power <10w, tanks are higher<100, and drippers are higher still 50+. There’s crossover in those categories (some pod systems are higher power, some tanks and drippers go lower and higher), but in the end you still get less nic from those systems than you do vape products. I’ve also read that the other chemicals in cigarettes makes the nicotine stay in your system for longer, hence why you see people switching from cigarettes to vaping will hit it harder and for a longer period than they do cigarettes.
Nobody knows the long-term effects of vaping yet because nobody has done long-term studies on it.
There’s been a 10+ real-world study involving millions of people that you’re ignoring.
Also, vaping products are more addictive than tobacco products because they contain, on average, more than twice the amount of nicotine.
Can you back that statement up?
I hear you, and I’m under no illusions that vaping is totally risk free, but if you’re a smoker then the pros of switching to vaping far outweigh the cons. In the UK (where I’m from, but not where I live), the government’s public health services fully support vaping as a smoking cessation method (obviously while also saying that, yeah, you shouldn’t do it if you’re not already smoking), and generally speaking they’re a lot less cavalier about stuff like this than the FDA. I’m fully aware that there might be unintended long-term consequences to it, but at the same time it’s that versus the near certainty of long term smoking-related health issues. And it seems to be working – people are quitting smoking by switching to vaping, but very few people who have never smoked are starting to vape.
Also – while they do contain more nicotine, the rates present in US vape juice goes much higher than in Europe, where it’s regulated more strictly. The nicotine can also be diluted by adding nic-free oils, which is what several people I know have done in order to break their addictions.
But we *do* know that smoking is very, very bad for not only it’s users, butt bystanders, family members (incl. children), and pets (not that anyone cares). John Hopkins, a well-regarded research institution, determined that vaping exposes users to only 1% of the chemical load that smoking does, and the impact of 2nd hand vape, aside from the fabulous smells, were negligible in their study. Is that a long-term lung-health study? Nope, didn’t say that it was. But it’s hard to argue with something that’s literally a 10,000x better choice than smoking.
Vaping is not healthy. It has not been on the market that long, we do not know everything about it. And 79.69% of all statistics are made up on the spot…which you just did. You are claiming to be an expert by reading a few articles, I bet you are also anti vax and flat earther?Look we get it, you VAPE, shut the fuck up about it. The point is FLAVORED SHIT, just like in the 80’s and early 90s when they were doing all that flavored bullshit cigs.
Vaping is not healthy.
Nobody said it was.
It has not been on the market that long, we do not know everything about it.
People have been vaping nicotine for over 10 years, but we haven’t seen any deaths from vaping over that same period. I wonder why…
And 79.69% of all statistics are made up on the spot…which you just
did. You are claiming to be an expert by reading a few articles, I bet
you are also anti vax and flat earther?
Fuck off with your bullshit.
Look we get it, you VAPE, shut the fuck up about it.
No.
Flavored liquids have been around for a very, very long time. I’ve been vaping for almost 15 years and was on the e-cigarette forum when it was in its infancy. These liquids were developed by adult users who wanted to try something new, other than the terrible tasting tobacco liquids of the day. The DIY mixing community was born and many of them made small internet businesses out of it. It had nothing to do with trying to get kids to vape.
As a temporary measure its fine. Its basically “stop selling this shit until we figure out how this chemical is getting into it.Of course with the THC stuff the real answer is “Hey douchebags, its obvious we are all doing it. So why dont you just legalize and regulate it just like you do everything else? Then you KNOW whats in it.”
the vaping ban is absolute fucking horseshit and is a rather transparent
example of the government being bought off by big tobacco.
I’d love to know who you think owns vaping companies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Forget it, man, it’s Conspiracy Theory Town. The vapers think they’ve beaten Big Tobacco they don’t think they’re lining the pockets of those companies.
The tobacco companies didn’t at first. There were tons of independent companies but eventually BT stepped in like Walmart into a small town.
I’d love to know who you think owns vaping companies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not Big Tobacco. I’ve vaped for over 5 years, not a single product I’ve ever purchased was developed or marketed by Big Tobacco. Big Tobacco is supporting this vapor ban because they’ve been unable to break into the vapor market.
Big Tobacco is supporting this vapor ban because they’ve been unable to break into the vapor market.
Uh, who cares about who “developed and marketed” anything. What matters is ownership, not branding.
By market share, here are the top 5 e-cig brands:Juul- Largest shareholder (35%) is Altria, which owns Philip Morris and other tobacco companies and brands.2. Vuse – Owned outright by the British American Tobacco Company3. blue eCigs – Shares a parent company with Imperial Brands, the fourth largest cigarette company in the world4. LOGIC – A brand of Japan Tobacco International5. NJOY- Private ownership, no tobacco that I could find.In 2016, the top 4 companies represented 80% of the Vaping market share based on unit sales (Nielson). So no, they haven’t failed to break in.
By market share, here are the top 5 e-cig brands
Where are you getting that from?
Juul- Largest shareholder (35%) is Altria, which owns Philip Morris and other tobacco companies and brands.
2. Vuse – Owned outright by the British American Tobacco Company
3. blue eCigs – Shares a parent company with Imperial Brands, the fourth largest cigarette company in the world
4. LOGIC – A brand of Japan Tobacco International
5. NJOY- Private ownership, no tobacco that I could find.I’ve vaped for over 5 years now. I’ve only ever seen those products in convenience stores, not vapor shops, and I’ve never seen anybody either buying them or using them.
In 2016, the top 4 companies represented 80% of the Vaping market share
based on unit sales (Nielson). So no, they haven’t failed to break in.Where are you getting these numbers?
So no, they haven’t failed to break in.
Juul existed before Altria bought a stake in them. Altria bought that stake because nobody was buying the vapor products that Altria was making & selling. Buying a stake Juul was an admission that vapers don’t want anything to do with Big Tobacco. The fact that vape shops barely carry Juul says the same thing.
Where are you getting that from?Use Google. Where are you getting these numbers?Use Google.
Juul existed before Altria bought a stake in them. Altria bought that stake because nobody was buying the vapor products that Altria was making & selling.
Again, a very irrelevant fact.
To remind you how this conversation started, you called bullshit on me talking about ownership, not the first people to market them.
Where are you getting these numbers?
Nielson data. It’s used by a study commissioned by the CDC.
By the way, more recent Nielson data has Juul+Vuse at a whopping 83% of the market share.
Dude needs to learn how to Google for himself.
Nielson data. It’s used by a study commissioned by the CDC.
By the way, more recent Nielson data has Juul+Vuse at a whopping 83% of the market share.There’s a major flaw here:
e-Cigarette retail sales data were licensed from the Nielsen Company for
convenience, club, and discount/dollar stores, mass merchandisers,
supermarkets, pharmacies, and military commissaries. Sales data reflect
all documented sales in the store types monitored; internet and “vape
shop” sales are not captured.
Ignoring sales in vape shops and online is a big problem, because the products that Big Tobacco sells are only sold in convenience stores, not in vape shops. I’ve vaped for over 5 years and I’ve never bought anything at a convenience store, only at a vape shop. If you only look at a handful of products, then of course those products are going to dominate the market. But you data will be flawed.
How do you explain the fact that the actual valuations are so high compared to other brands then?
How do you explain the fact that the actual valuations are so high compared to other brands then? They’re only looking at brands sold in convenience stores, not sold online or in vape shops. And valuations are guesses at the possible value of a company, so they’re kinda based on bullshit in the first place. Look at Uber or WeWork.And compared to which other brands?
Watching you get owned up and down this thread, combined with the confirmation by two other commenters that you are the troll I thought you were? Always feels good to be right. Welcome to my list. “Citation needed.”
Also, one person on Twitter claimed to go back to traditional cigarettes to quit Juuling and every news outlet ran with it to herald it as undeniable proof that e-cigs can’t possibly be used to quit smoking because this one guy is retarded addicted to nicotine with no self restraint.
On one hand, you’re kind of right.On the other hand, Big Tobacco already owns the major vape companies and walking down the street behind a guy spewing a giant cloud that smells like cotton candy sucks and I’ll be glad to no longer do it.
The “giant cloud” vapes are not usually the ones owned or made by tobacco companies fyi. Those are mods, usually the little sticks that release a little puff are the ones owned by those companies.
Big Tobacco already owns the major vape companies
No, they don’t. Can you provide a list of vapor companies owned by Big Tobacco?
walking down the street behind a guy spewing a giant cloud
Those devices aren’t made by Big Tobacco.
No, they don’t. Can you provide a list of vapor companies owned by Big Tobacco?Use Google.
Regardless of who makes them, they’re shitty, the people huffing them are trashy, and I will never defend your right to stink up my sidewalk like grape or cotton candy
I mean I’d rather have the cotton candy cloud than a regular cigarette smoke cloud…
On one hand I completely see your point and agree with you. On the other hand those flavored e-cigs DO get kids hooked. I’ve been teaching for awhile and have never seen an epidemic of kids using drugs quite like they currently vape.
You know what George Carlin said about the children.
Lol people defending vaping.
Big tobacco paid almost $13 billion for a stake in Juul…
My problem with is is, what they have listed like 8 deaths total? WHAT THE HELL – How about, Guns, Alcohol, Actual Cigarettes, things with HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of deaths attributed to them – and hey -it’s cool….Sigh…
Diacetyl is the chemical that causes popcorn lung, not Vitamin E acetate. A 2016 study tested 51 vape flavors offered by major brands – they don’t specify which – and found 47 that contained diacetyl (source)
Diacetyl is the chemical that causes popcorn lung, not Vitamin E acetate.
Nobody said vitamin E acetate causes popcorn lung.
A 2016 study tested 51 vape flavors offered by major brands – they don’t specify which – and found 47 that contained diacetyl (source)
1) Diacetyl was removed from the few liquids that used it years ago.
2) Tobacco cigarettes contain far more diacetyl than any eliquid ever did, yet smokers don’t get popcorn lung. Can you explain that?
Literally the first comment in this thread says that:scientists do actually know THE EXACT CHEMICAL THAT CAUSED THE ILLNESS (i.e. Vitamin E acetate).1) Diacetyl is still widely used. You know how I know? Because even pro-vaping sites note that “many of the best vape juice companies don’t use diacetyl in their products.” Not “none of the best,” not “no vape juice company uses diacetyl.”2) Smokers can get popcorn lung; COPD tends to be the default diagnosis for tobacco users exhibiting shortness of breath and a persistent cough. Vape users start to exhibit symptoms 2-6 weeks after inhaling diacetyl, which is too short a timeframe for COPD. Also, no, tobacco cigarettes don’t contain “far more” diacetyl: a study of 41 different cigarette brands found a range of 12.7 – 145 micrograms of diacetyl per cigarette (Source). E-cigarettes, on the other hand, range from 1-239 micrograms per e-cigarette. And vape users take larger and more frequent puffs than smokers (source), so the symptoms manifest themselves more quickly.
scientists do actually know THE EXACT CHEMICAL THAT CAUSED THE ILLNESS (i.e. Vitamin E acetate).
That’s true, but the illness it’s causing is not popcorn lung.
Diacetyl is still widely used. You know how I know? Because even pro-vaping sites note that “many of the best vape juice companies don’t use diacetyl in their products.” Not “none of the best,” not “no vape juice company uses diacetyl.”
Citation needed.
Smokers can get popcorn lung; COPD tends to be the default diagnosis for tobacco users
exhibiting shortness of breath and a persistent cough. Vape users start
to exhibit symptoms 2-6 weeks after inhaling diacetyl, which is too
short a timeframe for COPD.
Can you provide anything to back those statements up?This diacetyl shit is years old, and debunked.
Well since the recent spate of illnesses wasn’t associated with popcorn lung, it’d be nice if you’d shut the fuck up until you know what you’re talking about. This sort of bullshit misinformation is a large part of the problem.
The “leading e-cigarette brands” are the ones owned by the tobacco companies. The bottles found in vape shops are not. I remember, several years ago, when the first scare came out in the vaping community about diacetyl. It was in very few base flavorings to begin with (Flavor Art, Lorann, Capellas, etc.). Every DIY mixer and mom and pop seller tossed the liquids with those flavors. The companies making those concentrated flavors took them off the shelves and released new ones without that chemical.
Around that time, there was another scare about the chemicals in e-cigs after a study came out. Turned out, the study was prompted by the tobacco companies and the cartridges were provided by them for the study. Of course, it came back with all kinds of interesting bad things in them. If they tested something off the shelf from a vape shop or someone’s kitchen, it would not have.
Neither you nor I know what “leading e-cigarette brands” refers to in that study. The specific brands are omitted specifically to avoid accusations of bias, so “leading” could refer to relative market share, to popularity, or to reputation.That aside, more recent studies (albeit with small sample sizes) have also raised concerns about the potential harmful effects of propylene glycol and vegetable glycerin (PG-VG) in e-cigarettes, including reduction in peak blood flow and blood acceleration (source), and PG-VG is, I believe, commonly used in vape juice. Personally, I don’t give a shit about vaping one way or the other. Is the vape ban an overreaction? Probably, yeah – we don’t know enough about the precise effects vaping has on the body. But what we do know so far isn’t encouraging, and it’s bizarre to me how many people (not necessarily you, just based on the replies I’ve gotten) cherry-pick data and anecdotes rather than accept the increasing likelihood that, really, vaping isn’t particularly good for you.
You do realize the biggest owner of Juul is Big Tobacco? Blu is owned by Imperial Tobacco? Vuse is owned by RJ Reynolds? Who do you think is making money of the vape industry, mom and pops?
First they came for the Vapes, Second they came for your Skinny Jeans.. Third they came for your Avocado Toast… What’s next?
the vaping ban is absolute fucking horseshitThat Nicotine isn’t a controlled substance is absolute fucking horseshit.
This is very untrue.
In canada we now have two cases where its a build up from the original formula that was deemed safe. They’d not altered the dose or anything and were like children.
Nah man. Don’t be upset that vaping is not the alternative to cigarettes, but actually a more worse form of them. And don’t delude yourself into thinking consuming this “juice” doesn’t have any negative long-term consequences.
Don’t be upset that vaping is not the alternative to cigarettes, but actually a more worse form of them.
Citation needed.
Don’t be upset that vaping is not the alternative to cigarettes, but actually a more worse form of them.Please explain to me how vaping well-regulated nicotine oils is worse than smoking cigarettes. And don’t delude yourself into thinking consuming this “juice” doesn’t have any negative long-term consequences. I mean, since no-one knows what the long-term effects are… not really a ‘delusion’ is it? You know what definitely has negative long-term consequences? Smoking cigarettes.
You’ll note that I never said vaping was healthy, btw, just that it’s better than smoking.
Dude big tobacco owns vaping companies. Why would they ban themselves?
Dude big tobacco owns vaping companies.
Citation needed.
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/issues/e-cigarettes
https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/20/18148868/juul-altria-tobacco-ecigarettes-vaping-business
Like less then a half second search.
Yes, Big Tobacco has a hand in a few brands of e-cigarettes. But the vast majority of e-cigarettes are not made by Big Tobacco. So they’re not banning themselves, they’re banning their competitors. The brands listed are not carried in vape shops, only in convenience stores & gas stations, which, coincidentally, are the only places looked at when talking about market share for those brands. For some reason, online sales & vape shop sales are completely ignored, so only Big Tobacco vape products get counted. The only one of those brands I’ve ever seen in vape shops is Juul, and only recently and not for long, since it didn’t sell well. There are better products for cheaper than Juul.
Like less then a half second search.
It’s not my job to support your argument. Support your claims.
Oh hey JUUL CEO, I see you.
If only vape pens were in the second amendment. Then it wouldn’t matter *how* deadly they were.
I too think it is bullshit to ban all the vape flavors, but… the drop in teen and younger smoking has been completely reversed (a decade plus worth of public health work) in just 2 years due to vaping, and it is all these silly bubble gum and fruit flavors that are getting them addicted to nicotine all over again. The pendulum is swinging too far the other way right now but a compromise needs to be reached of much stricter enforcement keeping these products out of children’s hands.
the drop in teen and younger smoking has been completely reversed (a decade plus worth of public health work) in just 2 years due to vaping
No, it hasn’t. Those people aren’t smoking cigarettes! I wonder why the UK hasn’t seen an ‘epidemic’ of teen vaping.
I’m all for enforcement/regulation. But in the UK it’s had the exact opposite effect – smokers are quitting by vaping, and only a tiny proportion of people have started vaping without first smoking. The health services couldn’t be happier with it. You’re right though, because that probably wouldn’t be the case if the EU hadn’t restricted advertising, nicotine levels, etc. But it’s just, like, why not do that first?
If you think “big tobacco” has any power anymore at all, you are fooling yourself.
LOL
Weird fun fact: Big tobacco is also big vape. The biggest vape companies are owned by the biggest tobacco companies and they have huge lobbying arms.With this in mind, I’m super curious about what’s the driving force behind the ban. Do the tobacco companies hate their own vape brands so much so as to get them banned? Or is the government that concerned about the unknown health impacts of vaping despite the fact that we know tobacco removes darn near a half a million people a year?
Big tobacco is also big vape. The biggest vape companies are owned by
the biggest tobacco companies and they have huge lobbying arms.
Citation needed.
Do the tobacco companies hate their own vape brands so much so as to get them banned?
The majority of vapor brands are not owned by Big Tobacco. Big Tobacco’s backing the bans because they’ve largely been unable to get a foothold in the vapor market.
Citation needed.Use Google
Citation needed.Use Google.
I’ll refer to NoOnesPost:Juul- Largest shareholder (35%) is Altria, which owns Philip Morris and other tobacco companies and brands. Vuse – Owned outright by the British American Tobacco Company blue eCigs – Shares a parent company with Imperial Brands, the fourth largest cigarette company in the worldLOGIC – A brand of Japan Tobacco InternationalNJOY- Private ownership, no tobacco that I could find.
Alright, I exaggerated. Tobacco companies own three of the five most popular ecig brands and has a large hand in the most popular.As of January 2019, Juul has an amazing share of the ecig market. No wonder you don’t see people vaping those other brands. Admittedly the last time I was into vaping, Vuse was the top brand. See this outdated graph..Side note: I had a battery thing, tanks, and vaped juice without any nic. I miss that battery. It was $30 and had a capacity so good you could charge a phone from dead to 100% with it and still vape. And for clarification, I’m not at all against vaping. I just find it so puzzling that 6 people die and that leads to having to ban vaping while an estimated 1300 people die a day from cigarettes, but no concern there.
As of January 2019, Juul has an amazing share of the ecig market.
I noticed the second paragraph in that article right away:
The market share is based primarily on Nielsen convenience store data
for the four-week period that ended Dec. 29. Juul’s market share dipped
from 76.1 percent in the previous report.
This is a big problem, because that means that they’re completely ignoring sales in vapes shops, looking only at convenience stores instead. The only vapor products in convenience stores are Big Tobacco vapor products, and the products in convenience stores are not the products that are sold in vape shops.
No wonder you don’t see people vaping those other brands.
I don’t see people using them because they don’t sell in anywhere near the same numbers as the non-Big Tobacco products sold in vape shops, where the majority of vapor products are sold.And here’s a major difference between the products that Big Tobacco sells vs. the products that most vapers actually use:One example is the iQOS brand sold by Philip Morris International in non-U.S. markets.Philip
Morris International had projected gaining FDA approval to sell its
Marlboro heat sticks in the U.S. in 2018. The manufacturer entered the
FDA regulatory pipeline in May 2017 to market the heat sticks as a
modified-risk product.The products that Big Tobacco sell still contain actual tobacco, or some of them, at least. The products solds in vape shops contain zero tobacco.
Fair points! I apologize for missing that! I guess a true statement would be that big tobacco has their hands in convenience store vaping products. Makes a lot more sense why they would support a ban like this, then.I wonder how much of a huge undertaking it would be to include vape shops in statistics? While I no longer vape, I’ve had girlfriends that did. It amazes me how two shops can have vastly different products.
I wonder how much of a huge undertaking it would be to include vape shops in statistics?
It wouldn’t be that hard, since there’s a lot more convenience stores/gas stations than there are vape shops (they’re legal, registered businesses operating with appropriate licenses), although online sales might be harder to monitor. But then the government would also have to acknowledge that these bans would close all those small businesses which employ thousands of people & generate millions in taxes for their cities & states.
@NoOnesPost @TheGCU
Big tobacco is at least set, paradoxically, to profit from the flavors ban: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/wjwz5x/big-tobacco-will-take-advantage-of-the-mysterious-vape-illnessThe theory is that the massive, Big Tobacco brands (Juul, Vuse) etc. will be big enough to take the hit from the ban, but their smaller, independent competitors will not. That might seem like an unnecessarily risky scheme for limited reward, but as TheGCU says, since those products don’t sell anywhere near as much online and in vape stores (which are mostly stocked with the smaller indie products), that most likely represents a pretty big market share for them.I dunno. It’s maybe all a little conspiratorial to suggest that Big Tobacco triggered the ban, but they are probably going to come out of it doing pretty well.
Tobacco has the money to take the hit, little vape shops don’t.
Weird fun fact: Big tobacco is also big vape. The biggest vape companies are owned by the biggest tobacco companies and they have huge lobbying arms.With this in mind, I’m super curious about what’s the driving force behind the ban. Do the tobacco companies hate their own vape brands so much so as to get them banned? Or is the government that concerned about the unknown health impacts of vaping despite the fact that we know tobacco removes darn near a half a million people a year?
IKR! Them: “Vaping has many fruity flavors that entice children to try it. I needs to be banned!”Me: Does this mean we need to ban Schappes as well?Them:Me: That’s what I thought.
I don’t think it takes being bought off by big tobacco. The simple fact is that government agencies and politicians are just corrupt and clueless people, who spend most of their time generating the need to exist, and the rest of their time raising money and staying in office. Something like this comes up and no one really cares about the actual cause (Vitamin E acetate in THC compounds), but more about doing or saying stuff that plays to their base and placates voters. So it is “this stuff is evil, we will save you, and think of the children” rather than “we will do a thorough investigation, figure out the exact cause, and act efficiently and accurately”
Wah.
This is what happens when you slowly allow your government to police your body.
Ban selling to minors? They already have that in place. They have it in place for cigarettes too and that doesn’t stop kids from smoking.
Sure, fine, but vaping’s still pretty stupid.
Why people who are armed with all the scientific insights of the centuries of human civilization want to take up such garbage is beyond my comprehension.
Dude your obviously just a pissed off douchebag who’s addicted to flavored vapes. I used to be all over that shit for about a year, but I stopped because it was irritating my lungs. And it’s not just one chemical you fucking retard. There are so many bad chemicals in vape juice. Now I’m not some walking psa, cuz I smoke weed all the time because it’s barely bad for you. But vaping is retarded. I get that the advertising could fool people and if your addicted that’s not your fault but when you get all pissy like a little pubescent bitch because you cant get your mango juul pods, that’s when its apparent that your an idiot. Your defending something that can fuck your lungs for life in a year. And selling them to minors is already banned. It’s not that fucking easy. I know a kid who juul all the time and guess how he gets it? He doesnt stroll in and ask for a pack of pods, he gets an adult he knows to go in and get it. You obviously dont know how the world works so shut your stupid fucking face and stop blowing smoke. Sorry, fruity steam
here’s the Phillip Morris stock ticker… Notice the huge jump and correlate the dates with the ban announcements;
This is the same heavy handed approach that brought on bans of plastic straws. Its a band-aid solution to a problem, not really a fix.
>But no, instead of simply banning that one ingredient, we’re going to outright ban something that has got millions to quit smoking, a far deadlier habit, because reasons. Oh and as for ‘the kids’… Just ban selling them to minors? It’s really not that hard.I find it amusing that you think it’s as easy as “simply banning” a key ingredient that helps keep the product stable… equally as amusing that you think “ban selling them to minors” is “really not that hard.” (As if the product aren’t already banned to minors, lmao).
Your comment is a clear and concise example as to why this shit got banned. People are fucking idiots, and they don’t understand a single thing. And they wonder why shit happens.
Hi!
Vitamin E Acetate is a cutting agent used in illicit THC mixtures. It is not necessary to the stability of either THC mixtures or regular nic salts. You’ll note that there are thousands of nicotine and THC-containing vaping products available that don’t use it, hence why the health crisis was limited to around 2000 cases measured against the millions of people who vape.
Also, the ‘ban selling them to minors’ comment was meant to be taken within the context of the present day, where we DON’T ban alcohol or cigarettes or guns or pornography or (in some places) marijuana simply because kids might get hold of them. Especially when the thing in question has the potential to alleviate a far more serious problem (i.e. smoking cigarettes). ‘It’s not that hard’ = ‘it’s not that hard to think of a way to deal with this problem.’
People are fucking idiots, and they don’t understand a single thing.Well, I suppose that’s true sometimes.
Wow, a “serious discussion” about a comedy show. Slow news day?
“This is where things get a bit tricky; the guards are rather casual about the vileness of their actions. What they’re doing is obviously wrong, but they don’t seem to act with much malice, with their ultimate goal just being to cover their asses”https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse
C+? Why are you reviewing South Park if a really good episode like this gets a C+? This was the best premiere in years. The episode didn’t make a coherent point because they’re just setting up the plots. You don’t complain a film isn’t a complete package 15 minutes in, do you?
I gave up on this guy’s reviews last season when he complained that the show wasn’t telling him how to feel…if I wanted someone to tell me how to feel, I’d quit watching television and join a cult. Just going to come here for the comment section…which is so far disappointingly sparse. Agree with you that this felt like mostly strong setup, while getting in some good jokes. Loved the classic South Park joke of Kyle giving a metaphor (“a Mexican Joker”) and idiots immediately making it literal (removing the “a”). That’s always going to be funny to me.
Sorry…i’m shadow banned.
Kyle’s dilemma is my life.
The AV club is nothing but meme material now. All it is is just looking for an angle and trying to push social justice on a cartoon that literally sh#&$ on social justice.
I’m glad he’s strict on South Park, where were you two seasons ago when the writers even admitted to messing up and recycled the same joke for an entire year?
It was unbearable to watch, and if Stone and Park are going to start getting lazy like that again, they might as well end the whole thing and just stick to Broadway.
seriously, south park seasons are longer pieces now. I haven’t seen the ep yet but expect it’s laying down groundwork to build upon and reference for the remainder of the season.
There’s no way you can be typing this with a straight face.
Did you watch this two seasons ago when they first tried this year experiment? It was horrible, they kept making the same stupid joke every episode because Stone and Park admitted that they had no idea what to do if trump got elected.
They’re only longer because they can stretch out jokes, it’s easier to write when you don’t have to edit anything out but it clearly shows laziness.
C+? Why are you reviewing South Park if a really good episode like this gets a C+?
Because “agreeing with Matt” is not a requirement for being a professional reviewer.
You don’t complain a film isn’t a complete package 15 minutes in, do you?
A good episode of TV can stand as a satisfying work AND set up plot points. These things are not mutually exclusive.
I found this a C+ at best. There were a handful of very good jokes, but the plot wasn’t great and moved too quickly. They’ve hit the point where they either try to do so much, or care so little, that rather than really make any point that would drive the humor, they kind of dance around and say very little while expecting the absurdity to be funny. It feels like one that they did in 3 days when it needed a solid 7.
Yeah I expected more thought, it felt rushed. The tegridy farms plot was getting old last year too
I agree. This episode basically decided not to have a coherent arc and instead just throw everything at the wall. Yeah, a lot of the random jokes and bits of satire they threw out were funny/biting, but the episode as a whole didn’t build to anything satisfying.
Looking back 5 episodes later, it seems like this episode exists just to set up plots that will pay off later. In previous seasons, South Park delivered episodes that set up season-long arcs and still stood alone as good, coherent stories. Not here. imo it’s the weakest episode so far (along with “Let Them Eat Goo,” which felt like a more-boring repeat of past “Cartman is a jerk” episodes).
A “professional” reviewer? He is a blogger. He might get paid but lets not act like he is Judith Crist. Its Gawker, a site that got wrecked because it was basically a dirt rag whose editor said he would post a sextape of a 4 year old.
Professional literally means they get paid and nothing more. It’s not a degree of ability.
And they get quoted on Wikipedia
Got ‘em.
So so so many comments on articles like this can be reduced to “my opinion is different than the writer’s opinion.”
A professional reviewer lmao. People need new hobbies. Tearing down and criticizing other peoples work is not a profession.
based on past reviews of south park here (not sure if all by the same guy), the rating was always based on whether the themes of the episode appropriately aligned with the reviewers political and moral ideology.the best was actually an A+ review where the reviewer stated that the SP episode got something right, but in reality the episode was making fun of that particular theme and the reviewer didn’t pick up on it.
the rating was always based on whether the themes of the episode
appropriately aligned with the reviewers political and moral ideology
LOL, welcome to the decaying carcass of the former Gawker Media. This is pretty much the SOP inside the little safe-space bubble these “critics” have built for themselves.
Not 15 minutes into a movie but if the entire point of a film is to set up other films in a series or cinematic universe but doesn’t stand on its own it’s perfectly legitimate to say it’s mediocre even if everything it sets up ends up being amazing.
They did this the past few seasons too.
The reviewer is hot garbage. Some of his reviews last season rank as 2-3 of the worst reviews of anything that I have ever read.
Respectfully stated, (along w/plenty other discussion here)… Staying on point, this review was actually quite impressive; moreso than I initially thought, w/plenty fine details & introspections…👌That all said, being a heavily biased major fan, I have to give it an A-, based on the overall intellectually consistent, creative excellence, Cartman’s return to form, & the continued very impressive soundtrack / audio & graphic qualities as well….The last few weeks promo teasers were outstandingly enjoyable as always, including the enjoyable additional interactive SPandMe site. Hopefully we may see more Buddha Box, and possible Coon to the rescue. Btw, for those in the same mindset / enjoying the ComedyCentral ads, look fwd to DoubleTap!! Maybe Southpark could incorporate a dash of that in their Halloween episode😈I close with Cartmans’ very groovy & poignant couch insight: “…How are us kids supposed to have any hope anymore? All I think about is all the problems our generation is inheriting; climate, overfishing, Kyle… I mean, how are we supposed get happy about anything?”🌈🤪😎🤟
This is freaking hilarious. A much needed palette cleanser after watching that god awful Modern Family season opener.
I feel like “millenial” is the best description of the author here. Go wherever you want with that.Slamming a SP season premiere for not giving up all the plot lines we’ll see in this ~20 episode season during the first 20 minute episode seems a little….. I don’t even want to say it, I’m sure you all completed the sentence for me there.SP is not your show if you expect the whole season to be laid out explained for you on the season premiere.
It’s funny how you mix up like 3 different types of media genres to just to make a point.
Here’s an easier one to follow: They’ve done better with less time, it’s fair to grade them on a standard that they established.
I agree. I thought it was one of the best episodes I’ve seen in a while. And that’s saying a lot. SP is one of the few long running shows I believe has kept it’s quality through the years and in some ways improved. Much like “The Venture Brothers”.
Congratulations to Lib Park, on creating THE worst episode of all time. This was a true Hall of Shame moment.
ICE is a wonderful organization. BTW, it was bIRAQ oBOMBa (aka Barry Newports) who forced kids to live in cages, wearing aluminum foil. NOT President Trump. South Park (more like Lib Park) is talking out of their behind. Good way to get CANCELLED. Great way to lose a loyal audience.
Hard to believe this show is still on. It has definitely had really funny moments, but nothing about it really holds up. Its quasi-libertarian make-fun-of-both-sides can be fun, but holds up as well as paper pants. And the older those two guys get, the more stale the jokes get.
Spoken like a Democrat or Republican.
I’m neither, but I’m certainly not a libertarian. I’m registered as an independent. But nice try, anyway, Columbo.
I think they were making a joke on your reference to how SP makes fun of both sides.
Well! Then bravo
Except they are total pussies that won’t directly show Drumpf as a buffoon. They had ACTUAL Hillary with a gun sticking out of her vagina, but they are too afraid of cheetolini to put him in the show for real. Goddam pussies. I’m guessing only 10% of viewers know that Mr. Garrison is supposed to be the traitorous villain from the White House. I have stopped watching it fuck those guys.
Have you voted for both parties?I can guess the answer.
I have, when I thought it prudent. I am not, however, a centrist, so I vote for whomever is aligned with my beliefs, which typically falls under one umbrella. But I have voted based on who was more qualified for the job over political leanings when it has made sense.I think both parties are corrupt, and even though I am more on one side than the other, I refuse to have my name associated with either brand of bullshit.
Oh please enlighten us, edgy contrarian.
Pick a side. There’s no Independent party of note.
And you can go pick your ass
You can vote for a major-party candidate without actually joining their party.
Explaining how jaded you are proves you’re just here to hate on the show.. stop what you’re doing and move on. Noone cares if you don’t like it. I’ll continue to watch it over and over again like i have been for years. Some jokes hit and some miss… LITERALLY every comedy series does this… perfect example would be SNL. But most of them miss hard on that show.
I think I figured out why you don’t find this show funny anymore…
Either way, it doesn’t excuse the fact that you’re wrong. It obviously still holds up if people are watching. Hell, you don’t even like the show and you’re still paying attention, so obviously they’re doing something right. I don’t even like or watch south park, yet here I am…
The only thing not holding up are your comments
As the country moves further away from the middle, more and more people hate centrists. Sad, because the middle is where common sense legislation gets worked out, the rest is crazy people screaming REEEEEEEEE
lol fuck off
To be fair, they have done a few really shallow episodes that make it really obvious they gave a serious issue less than a week’s worth of consideration. Their goobacks take was amazingly stupid.
This comment has become the South Park equivalent of going to an SNL article and leaving the comment “SNL hasn’t been funny since (insert season/beloved cast member leaving here)“ Congrats on being the first person to regurgitate it this year.
I’m sorry, but “Christian Rock Hard” is still hilarious, 13 years later. It doesn’t “hold up” because the episodes are usually written the week they’re aired and address current topics, which may or may not still have relevance years or even months later. The aforementioned episode is certainly dated, with it’s underlying plot of music downloading, but it’s still hilarious.
I actually feel the same way. It’s lost any magic and sparkle it once had.
But then I used to like the non-Cartman episodes that featured magic or ridiculous sci-fi in some way. I think the show was always best when it was just devolving into fantasy 😀
‘member that?
Ya the “look how dumb both sides” thing is dumb as hell when one side is starting forever wars and opening concentration camps and the other tried to expand healthcare.
The other side is also trying to start socialism. That’s horrifying in it’s own way.
One side is trying to take care of the citizens, end forever wars of empire and profit, and do things like give people health care and water that doesn’t melt your brain. But ya call it socialism and just have a knee jerk reaction to it because boomers say the reds are bad.
HAHAHA too dumb to realize it was going on under Obama…..
But both sides are foul morons and need to be ridiculed
It’s not Simpsons level, but it’s 1000000000000X better than Family guy.
What you mean is that you don’t like entertainment that has a point of view you disagree with.
Not true at all. I think you should re-read my comment.I can laugh at myself, and I can laugh at funny jokes poking holes in my side of the debate. To that end, I’ve enjoyed a lot of South Park. I enjoyed it when it first aired. However, revisiting it, a lot just doesn’t hold up for one reason or another. Mainly, because it’s produced to be timely – right up to the millisecond. But also, times and attitudes change, so a lot of jokes just haven’t aged well, or simply loose their punch.Again, I had always enjoyed the show to a certain degree. But I was in a hotel over the weekend, and I had time to kill, and newer episodes were on cable. I watched them… I didn’t find them awful, but I can’t say I laughed much, or out loud, at least.
Flip-flopper
I ouldn’t possibly disagree more💩
Last few seasons have been pretty blatantly against trumpism though
imo new South Park is hit-or-miss because the humor is so topical. When the humor’s just topical-for-the-sake-of-topical or shocking-for-the-sake-of-shocking, it tends to be cringey. When Parker and Stone actually have a fresh or interesting take on current events, I find it cathartic.
So much comedy now feels angry. Objectively, that’s fine, but I don’t enjoy being angry about politics and I don’t find anger cathartic. Most shows that are supposed to make me feel inspired and righteously angry just make me feel depressed – that’s why I stopped watching Samantha Bee and John Oliver. I like South Park because it more accurately depicts how I natively feel about politics: intellectually interested, emotionally sad, and a bit numb to it all. I feel like I really *get* Parker and Stone’s approach to politics in a way I don’t *get* say, Samantha Bee’s. tbh sometimes this makes me feel like a “bad liberal.”
“It’s difficult to say if we’re supposed to view them as virulent racists
who firmly believe what they’re doing is the right thing, to the point
where they’ve become numb to it, or if they truly believe they’re just
Doing Their Job and haven’t considered the morality of the situation
beyond that.”It’s South Park so I think you’re supposed to view them as ‘comedy delivery vehicles’ and not much else.
I guess this isn’t the end of serialization as we know it.
Really hope we don’t start sliding back into the heavy serialization with this new Tegridy Farms/Psycho Randy arc, though I’d be lying if I said it didn’t have potential (Towelie becoming his new weed business rival would be hilarious). Guess we’ll have to wait and see. Either way, it’s good to have this show back.Also gotta love how casually fucked-up Randy and Sharon’s relationship still is. How they never stayed divorced will always be a mystery.“BEST TOWEL YOU EVER HAD, BITCH!”
I’m guessing the Randy storyline will run through the season like the Cartman/Heidi relationship subplot did in season 21, with most of the episodes working fairly stand alone otherwise. Like, I wouldn’t be surprised if Kyle and Cartman are just back in South Park next week. Though I also expect we haven’t seen the last of Mexican Joker either.
Dunno if this is the best place to put this, but I’m gonna repost a comment of mine that’s stuck in the grays that addresses why I hope they stick with this story since I bothered to write it all out and would like people to read it lol…
While I don’t much watch South Park anymore, I like to pop in to read the premiere and finale reviews… That being said, this review highlighted something that I think might be a bit… off….
“Incensed, he leads Stan on a crusade to get homegrown weed banned, citing the risk it poses to children. This is a clear reference to the recently proposed ban on flavored vape juices…” While it’s entirely possible that this *is* the case (and there are def some parallels) I’d be open to considering this plot at face value, as Homegrow has been a huge sticking point between marijuana justice activists and legislators in many states, and one that has gotten relatively little coverage. This is a legitimate issue that’s happening NOW; while many assume that marijuana being legalized permits them to grow the plant themselves for recreational use (akin to a home brew kit or herb garden), the stigma surrounding the substance has led to a lot of states *not* including, considering, or severely limiting homegrow in their marijuana legalization bills, which has the potential to cause a lot of confusion and harm.For instance we, we saw this in places like New York this past session. Homegrow was a sticking point in senate negotiations, likely due to (as touched on in the episode) Big Medical Weed’s long-standing ties there (one of the earliest since the 90s), and heavy vocal LEO presence in Staten and Long Islands. They usually crow on with very infantalizing rhetoric about public safety, and were vocally against homegrow as a threat to public safety — in other words, this has happened just like in the show.Now this seems benign enough (simply another pedestrian case of businesses trying to get a leg up), until you consider that loopholes in drug and law enforcement legislation has been used for years to criminalize the poor and minorities. In NYC, for instance, TONS of bullshit drug-related arrests happen because NYCHA public housing (aka the projects) are actually regularly patrolled by the NYPD for security. In reality though, this demonstrably results in people getting harassed in their own homes, not knowing their rights, and getting charged for, say, simply smoking a joint where they live and answering the door. Now, if the legalization bill was passed without homgrow, an officer could *still* charge you in your home—if not for the joint he smells, but for the plant he spots in your kitchen when you open your door. Basically any ways in which the government can keep some power and weaponize the law against minorities and the poor they’ll likely take, and banning homegrow is a simple way of doing that which often seems innocuous to the public.Again, I don’t think I’m far off, re: South Park and Parker and Stone, as you can already see this worrying trend of government backpedaling on homegrow terms under pressure from capital and law enforcement. Look at Colorado: https://www.westword.com/marijuana/colorados-new-improved-medical-marijuana-rules-begin-in-november-2019-11491899 . Colorado used to have the laxest home grow laws in all of the country, allowing up to 99 plants for medicinal users, and 6 plants per recreational user in their residence — which meant that plenty of families, roommates, etc, would be able to grow a sizable stash for their household. Many people essentially used this scenario to build self sufficient co-ops, which bothered both business and law by 2016. In it “People are abusing the unlicensed industry in order to ship [pot] out of state,” said CO’s Director of Marijuana Coordination in this article, later saying “rural law enforcement agencies are overburdened with investigating potentially illegal marijuana grows, as most large-scale grows are based in rural counties.” To be clear, these crimes would by definition be nonviolent, corporate-related crimes *if* they took place as claimed; not the kind of infractions law are generally known for pursuing with the rabid zeal that they continue to do against growers, even in states where cannabis is legalized. Additionally, it’s mind-boggling how in this case law enforcement was brazenly able to label what these people do “criminal activity,” when it was in fact, not at all a crime in the state they were in. To go even further and pursue them/call them out based on actions they may or may not do entirely outside of your jurisdiction (that the federal government WILL NOT get involved in**) is the height/definition of targeting specific individuals — because they’re largely minority-run operations.The fucked thing is this rhetoric and push worked, and now there’s a total 12-plant cap per household, and only 3 of any individual’s 6 potential plans can be FLOWERING at a time. Additionally, counties and municipalities are permitted to have individual laws re: homegrow, making what’s legal or not dangerously inconsistent , and leaving the opportunity for cities to fully ban (read: criminalize) homegrow (https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/marijuana/home-grow-laws). After this happened, you’ll notice no state ever implemented homegrow legislation as loose as Colorado. But could you imagine if statewide laws told you how many bottles of your craft brew you could make a year — and then go further and tell you how many bottles you can crack open at a given time, just because someone a few states over might not be allowed to drink beer at all? Or if a cop came by your house because he knew you were making beer, and just wanted to come by count the bottles randomly, because it would be a white collar business-related crime to have too many bottles — regardless of whether you were even selling it or not? It’s silly when you think about it. And bigger point being, it further disenfranchises and targets, largely, those poor and POC that suffered at the hands of Law Enforcement already while growing your weed for you for the first few decades of your life, while simultaneously making it more likely for the usual suspects to dominate the industry landscape. As natives of Colorado, and outspoken libertarians against police abuse of power, it very much seems like homegrow itself could be a straightforward issue of interest on Parker and Stone’s radar, that could actually deserves to be explored in a more nuanced way in the mainstream.TL;DR: Maybe South Park could (and should), actually be about homegrow in a real way, and the abuses of power the government is doing on the downlow. Everything’s always about money and power, and even an issue that seems as clear cut as legalizing marijuana has all sorts of crannies of injustice to be looking out for —- and I hope the show’s points some of this out more glibly and entertainingly than I just did.**While in this episode the FBI got involved in the bombing, federal agencies couldn’t give a shit about, and actively harass dispensaries and growers because they are still considered illegal nationally. This has unfortunately made dispensaries hot spots for a number of truly heinous robberies, and with many operators both growing and storing funds in the same facilities, have left some people ruined.
Towlie has basically taken over as Randy’s wife (ie. the person he drops exposition too) however Randy’s closing comment was so nasty I think they may finally have Randy and Sharon get separated and send Stan back to South Park. I like Tegrity farms but it isn’t my favourite plot / setting they’ve done.
I shut this off about halfway in simply because it was so all-over-the-place and unfunny and uninteresting. This is far from Matt and Treys best work.
My favorite part of the episode (besides the opening focusing on Tegridy Farms like some Green Acres rip-off) was when the guards find out Kyle is Jewish and you can see them realize the inherent immorality about holding a Jew in a camp after separating families, but then they just fail to make the connection to doing the same with Latinos.
“It’s difficult to say if we’re supposed to view them as virulent racists who firmly believe what they’re doing is the right thing, to the point where they’ve become numb to it, or if they truly believe they’re just Doing Their Job and haven’t considered the morality of the situation beyond that. Assuming the detention center will be making a return in future episodes, I’d like to see the guards’ motivations fleshed out a bit more.”1) maybe the ambiguity is the point?2) I can’t think of a recent example where someone was overthinking South Park more. Are you a college freshman? First hit of real weed?
It’ll also be hard to flesh out the motivations of the guards since the director of the camp killed them all.
Man. Read his reviews of last season if you really want to see some “just finished freshman year philosophy and political science and had a liberal activist girl touch his dick for the first time” writing.
You’re so brave.
Damn, I see you just flunked freshmen philosophy and political science and got turned down by a “liberal activist girl”
Man, if you think this is clever, I pity you.
I feel like they made them pretty clearly racist without being complete caricatures
Are they still pretending that Trump doesn’t exist? As a person that literally grew up with South Park (it came out during my senior year of HS), that was the single biggest disappointment of the series for me.
Considering that the show isn’t taking on anyone in particular but rather the system as a whole, I don’t see it as a problem that the ICE people aren’t “virulent racists”. I’m sure there are such in real life, but they’re just a really specific and generally easier target.
all the drug addicts wanting their fix crying about their favorite new drug getting banned, get a life
Topics : our over sensitive culture. Subtopics: 1.pick n choosing which communities to be sensitive about and completely ignoring others. 2. Governments hilarious warning about joker movie inciting a follower and violence – over sensitivity – sounds coherent to me
Does anyone here actually know a Border Patrol agent? To cast them all as horrific, sadistic racists is beyond irresponsible. And considering a lot of them are of Hispanic descent, it kind of goes against the whole ‘racist’ argument. Do people actually believe that our borders shouldn’t be guarded or we shouldn’t ask people who they are and why are they here when they cross our border? Should we just let the traffickers have at it and wash our hands of any rule of law at the border?
South Park lost me years ago. It’s become the Simpsons. It wore out it’s welcome. It’s no longer relevant for these times. Cancel it!
A potential viewer has stopped viewing, time to cancel a profitable show that many other viewers continue to enjoy.
A lot have stopped viewing. South Park peaked years ago. The world moved on. South Park is no longer relevant. It’s a Rick and Morty world now.
A lot have stopped viewing.Lets seem them sources, or are you just using your own personal anecdote and making assumptions?
It’s not about ratings it’s about relevance. The show just isn’t cool and hip anymore. It’s fallen out of favor.
Again, lets see some cited sources because what you just said, sounds like a subjective opinion. There wouldn’t be three more seasons confirmed. They produce each in the week prior to it airing, meaning it’s highly relevant, regardless of what you think.
The show has been dipping in the ratings every year.2017 – https://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/wednesday-cable-ratings-sept-13-2017/2018 – https://www.reddit.com/r/southpark/comments/9kx8w0/south_parks_popularity_at_an_alltime_low/
Here’s the problem with both those links. Those are strictly TV viewership numbers. It’s not accounting for Hulu, which is where I watch the episodes. While this article is a few years old, it should give you a solid idea as to how much the show means to Hulu, and the users that use Hulu.
https://www.theverge.com/2015/7/8/8913997/hulu-south-park-300-episodes-2019-wowUnfortunately, it appears Hulu doesn’t publish viewership ratings for shows they feature. At least, not that I can find.Lastly, you can’t expect a show that has been on the air for over 20 years to pull in the same numbers forever. That doesn’t mean it’s irrelevant, out of style or “fallen out of favor”.
Lastly, you can’t expect a show that has been on the air for over 20 years to pull in the same numbers forever.
Told ya! End of discussion!
NEXT in line!
You don’t get to say, Next in line. You’re not playing by the rules.
What. You said and I quote:“The world moved on. South Park is no longer relevant.” “It wore out it’s welcome. It’s no longer relevant for these times. Cancel it!”The show still pulls in massive numbers, simply not pulling in the numbers it did at one point in it’s televised life does not mean it’s irrelevant. Which is entirely my point. It’s still the #1 show on Comedy Central by a long shot.So again, you’re wrong.
No, I was quoting.
I doubt Comedy Central will cancel their most watched show just because some people feel like it’s not relevant anymore.
You’re probably right. Look at the Simpsons. Every time anyone mentions that show you have peeps sayin, that show is still on?
I love Rick and Morty, but as a replacement for SP? Oh jeez. They’re not even remotely similar. R&M is very broad slapstick with some pseudoscience in the mix to make the people who understand their references because they finished high school feel smart.Even if we did take your statement seriously, at least SP was relevant at some point. R&M never was, they just made us laugh.
A few pieces of evidence:1) This article which is about South Park2) South Park is still being produced by a name network3) 4) Internet commenter claims South Park is no longer relevant and “[T]he world has moved on.”Of course additional data points should be considered, but have not been offered.Based on the above information what conclusion most likely?
That graph is an overall rating. It needs to be updated. It doesn’t show rating per-season. The show has been dipping in the ratings every year.
2017 – https://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/wednesday-cable-ratings-sept-13-2017/
2018 – https://www.reddit.com/r/southpark/comments/9kx8w0/south_parks_popularity_at_an_alltime_low/
According to the more recent link over a million people watched the premiere, which is down, but still over a million people.So thank you for another data point demonstrating relevance and the world having not moved on. ( unfortunately Kinja doesn’t allow for editing prior posts or I would add it to the list above )
You see, It’s down! End of discussion!
NEXT in line!
… which, of course, wasn’t anywhere near your original claim.
Regardless of ratings or relevance… We can at least agree that South Park is passed it’s prime. It reached the top of the mountain of fame a while back. South Park is barely in the news these days.
Technically, it’s entertainment; why does it NEED to be relevant also?
I laughed when Cartman asked the ICE agent if he had a card. I also like how Cartman is so used to his insane plans going off the rails that he’s treating the detention center like a summer camp. And Randy’s fixation with whether or not he’s a towel is killing me.
Wish South Park would think back to their episode on the Goobacks and how mass immigration essentially transforms the country into that culture and landscape. As a Marvel quote goes “Asgard isnt a place, it’s a people. Asgard is wherever it’s people are.” Well, as much as I love South America, I don’t want to live in South America.I seems children are the perfect “human shield”. Want to make a political point that’s emotionally powerful? Have a child as a mouthpiece. Want to illegally immigrate to a country? Have a bunch of children to grant you immunity, and especially swarm in by the ten thousands daily to force you into bad conditions for accommodation so you can exploit that treatment.
As elizAbeth replied i’m AmAzed thAt A mom cAn eArn $7438 in four weeks on the computer. did you see this site go to this site home tAb for more detAil>>>>>http://www.today22.com
You’re the worst critic. It’s hilarious. Seriously! I hope you realize that comedy is subjective. You obviously just don’t get it or follow it. Your opinions don’t mirror 99% of the people that watch the show. It takes south park hundreds of hours to write and animate an episode just to have a wannabe film critic break it down. Get a real job. You’re doing no one any good with this sh*t.
😏Harsh… as noted in my reply he actually gave some solid positive insights & analysis, but definitely was an ‘A’ level episode👌
This article needs proofreading.
Needs proofreading and someone in the office who’s old enough to remember Green Acres, as far as the ‘new Tegrity opening credits’ go.
It’s difficult to say if we’re supposed to view them as virulent racists who firmly believe what they’re doing is the right thing, to the point where they’ve become numb to it, or if they truly believe they’re just Doing Their Job and haven’t considered the morality of the situation beyond that. Others have said this, but without exclamation marks: That’s the whole fucking point!!! Given the things real life Border Patrol and ICE agents have said in interviews and on social media, it’s basically a little of column A, a little of column B. Full disclosure, I haven’t watched South Park in years, let alone last night, but from what you’ve written this sounds spot on. When we finally get all our shit back on track, some of these guys will be sentenced for acts performed because they’re racist thugs, and others will be sentenced for accessory to acts performed because they were Just Following Orders or too chickenshit not to Go Along With The Crowd. And the Just Following Orders crowd isn’t always easily differentiated from the fascist thugs (nor, if you’re the judge passing sentence, should they be).
like ThelmA responded i Am stArtled thAt A mother cAn mAke $6821 in A few weeks on the computer. did you look At this web sitego to this site home tAb for more detAil>>>>>http://www.today22.com
So the tl:dr is that it’s better if they put one issue per episode? I can see them wanting to but the network wanting to be able to rerun most of the season for the next 20 years and saying “do all the issues in one episode please”.
til i looked At the pAycheck for $4252, i didn’t believe …thAt…my mother in lAw woz like ActuAley bringing home money pArttime At there lAbtop.. there sisters roommAte hAs been doing this for only twentey months And by now pAid for the depts on there plAce And bought themselves A infiniti. we looked here,go to this site home tAb for more detAil>>>>>http://www.today22.com
Fuck South Park and its multi-millionaire, dude-bro,libertarian creators. Do these shit heads still deny and mock climate change? What scumbags they are.
“Meanwhile, Kyle attempts to free all the children by converting them to Judaism, granting them the same immunity he has.”Please please please tell me this leads to a circumcision gag.
You’re a towel.
BEST TOWEL YOU EVER HAD, BITCH
The worst part of the episode is that this is not funny.
The whole thing was boring and hard to follow as it was hard to keep interest.
Also Randy needs to be backed away from, I get it people love him. He’s the new butters.. but fml he is not gonna carry south park.
The kids do that.
I thought it was hilarious.Humor…it’s different for everybody!
I dare Americans not want illegal immigrants in the country. The left really have become fascists.
I almost wonder if this is a set up for a follow up next week. The whole thing felt so disjointed.
It set up the whole season.
Oh, John, you’re such a towel.I honestly thought with the amount of content in this episode it would end up a to be continued episode. I still think before the end Randy will become Towel Joker
“if we’re supposed to view them as virulent racists who firmly believe what they’re doing is the right thing, to the point where they’ve become numb to it, or if they truly believe they’re just Doing Their Job and haven’t considered the morality of the situation beyond that.”What? It can be two things or even both st the same time. There’s a saying about how some Nazis knew they were wrong but said they were only doing their jobs.
Once again, South Park is being reviewed as someone’s graduate thesis first, and a piece of cultural entertainment….as a concession.
Almost like that whole “Mexican Joker” thing was a throwaway to get the authority figures focused on the wrong goddamn thing.
Oh look, more articles about how South Park’s thesis is about creating Mexican joker.
TL;DR : not PC enough for the author…
Philip Morris (basically) owns a large part of Juul. Vaping is good for their bottom line.
You don’t know what “in lieu” means.
“I hate watchin’ babies drown! Seems like a waste of good* baby.”
Who looks to this passe show for even the slightest form of relevance??
We all knew Cartman was a terrible person that does terrible things but tonight he definitely went too far. What kind of monster puts coffee in a soda suicide?
I also loved his genuine shame at “not getting Kyle back in another way”
Randy watching TV is the AV Club watching TVBad *click* bad *click* Good, but has antiquated gender stereotypes *click*
Why did Google recommended this article. 😣 “Bites of more than it can chew”What the hell is this donk talking about. Fake news.
I see how you could mix up the meaning of them trying to make homegrow illegal with the vape bans if you don’t live in colorado. Med men, the company that propositions Randy later in the episode, is a real company and they really are trying to make homegrow illegal in Colorado under the pretense of safety despite it being no more dangerous than growing your own vegetable garden.
IF this media group thinks its misses the mark then most average people will love it.
I’ve always thought that Ike is fucking adorable, and hearing him cry when ICE took him away genuinely broke my heart :'(
What they’re doing is obviously wrong, but they don’t seem to act with much malice, with their ultimate goal just being to cover their asses.Sounds like your typical American.
There’s nothing awkward or disjointed about this episode, unless viewed through the prism of a Puritan.
Hey all! I don’t much watch South Park anymore, but like to pop in to read the premiere and finale reviews… That being said, this review highlighted something that I think might be a bit… off…. That I’d like to highlight. Don’t know if I’ll be pulled from the greys or if its the right forum, but anyway… “Incensed, he leads Stan on a crusade to get homegrown weed banned, citing the risk it poses to children. This is a clear reference to the recently proposed ban on flavored vape juices…” While it’s entirely possible that this *is* the case (and there are def some parallels) I’d be open to considering this plot at face value, as Homegrow has been a huge sticking point between marijuana justice activists and legislators in many states, and one that has gotten relatively little coverage. This is a legitimate issue that’s happening NOW; while many assume that marijuana being legalized permits them to grow the plant themselves for recreational use (akin to a home brew kit or herb garden), the stigma surrounding the substance has led to a lot of states *not* including, considering, or severely limiting homegrow in their marijuana legalization bills, which has the potential to cause a lot of confusion and harm.For instance we, we saw this in places like New York this past session. Homegrow was a sticking point in senate negotiations, likely due to (as touched on in the episode) Big Medical Weed’s long-standing ties there (one of the earliest since the 90s), and heavy vocal LEO presence in Staten and Long Islands. They usually crow on with very infantalizing rhetoric about public safety, and were vocally against homegrow as a threat to public safety — in other words, this has happened just like in the show.
Now this seems benign enough (simply another pedestrian case of businesses trying to get a leg up), until you consider that loopholes in drug and law enforcement legislation has been used for years to criminalize the poor and minorities. In NYC, for instance, TONS of bullshit drug-related arrests happen because NYCHA public housing (aka the projects) are actually regularly patrolled by the NYPD for security. In reality though, this demonstrably results in people getting harassed in their own homes, not knowing their rights, and getting charged for, say, simply smoking a joint where they live and answering the door. Now, if the legalization bill was passed without homgrow, an officer could *still* charge you in your home—if not for the joint he smells, but for the plant he spots in your kitchen when you open your door. Basically any ways in which the government can keep some power and weaponize the law against minorities and the poor they’ll likely take, and banning homegrow is a simple way of doing that which often seems innocuous to the public.Again, I don’t think I’m far off, re: South Park and Parker and Stone, as you can already see this worrying trend of government backpedaling on homegrow terms under pressure from capital and law enforcement. Look at Colorado: https://www.westword.com/marijuana/colorados-new-improved-medical-marijuana-rules-begin-in-november-2019-11491899 . Colorado used to have the laxest home grow laws in all of the country, allowing up to 99 plants for medicinal users, and 6 plants per recreational user in their residence — which meant that plenty of families, roommates, etc, would be able to grow a sizable stash for their household. Many people essentially used this scenario to build self sufficient co-ops, which bothered both business and law by 2016. In it “People are abusing the unlicensed industry in order to ship [pot] out of state,” said CO’s Director of Marijuana Coordination in this article, later saying “rural law enforcement agencies are overburdened with investigating potentially illegal marijuana grows, as most large-scale grows are based in rural counties.” To be clear, these crimes would by definition be nonviolent, corporate-related crimes *if* they took place as claimed; not the kind of infractions law are generally known for pursuing with the rabid zeal that they continue to do against growers, even in states where cannabis is legalized. Additionally, it’s mind-boggling how in this case law enforcement was brazenly able to label what these people do “criminal activity,” when it was in fact, not at all a crime in the state they were in. To go even further and pursue them/call them out based on actions they may or may not do entirely outside of your jurisdiction (that the federal government WILL NOT get involved in**) is the height/definition of targeting specific individuals — because they’re largely minority-run operations.The fucked thing is this rhetoric and push worked, and now there’s a total 12-plant cap per household, and only 3 of any individual’s 6 potential plans can be FLOWERING at a time. Additionally, counties and municipalities are permitted to have individual laws re: homegrow, making what’s legal or not dangerously inconsistent , and leaving the opportunity for cities to fully ban (read: criminalize) homegrow (https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/marijuana/home-grow-laws). After this happened, you’ll notice no state ever implemented homegrow legislation as loose as Colorado. But could you imagine if statewide laws told you how many bottles of your craft brew you could make a year — and then go further and tell you how many bottles you can crack open at a given time, just because someone a few states over might not be allowed to drink beer at all? Or if a cop came by your house because he knew you were making beer, and just wanted to come by count the bottles randomly, because it would be a white collar business-related crime to have too many bottles — regardless of whether you were even selling it or not? It’s silly when you think about it. And bigger point being, it further disenfranchises and targets, largely, those poor and POC that suffered at the hands of Law Enforcement already while growing your weed for you for the first few decades of your life, while simultaneously making it more likely for the usual suspects to dominate the industry landscape. As natives of Colorado, and outspoken libertarians against police abuse of power, it very much seems like homegrow itself could be a straightforward issue of interest on Parker and Stone’s radar, that could actually deserves to be explored in a more nuanced way in the mainstream.TL;DR: Maybe South Park could (and should), actually be about homegrow in a real way, and the abuses of power the government is doing on the downlow. Everything’s always about money and power, and even an issue that seems as clear cut as legalizing marijuana has all sorts of crannies of injustice to be looking out for —- and I hope the show’s points some of this out more glibly and entertainingly than I just did.**While in this episode the FBI got involved in the bombing, federal agencies couldn’t give a shit about, and actively harass dispensaries and growers because they are still considered illegal nationally. This has unfortunately made dispensaries hot spots for a number of truly heinous robberies, and with many operators both growing and storing funds in the same facilities, have left some people ruined.
Fuck South Park. They should never be forgiven, for not taking a stand in 2016, and 2004. Of course, they are rich shit libertarians, so them understanding what would happen to their audience, is beyond their spectrum of caring. Still… fuck them, and may they live to be reviled one day soon.
South Park is still on? Good for them, I suppose.Is it still about how people who care about this issue are morons, and people who care about that issue are also morons, so why don’t we just not care at all and laugh at those who do?
This review was horrible. Maybe stop reviewing south park because you’re trash at it.
Am watching it now, and haven’t seen anything remotely funny in the first act. It’s almost like it isn’t even written to try to be funny.
It’s just a cartoon, dude.
I don’t know why, but when I saw “Mexican Joker”, my thought was they were going to try and base it off the upcoming movie. I am curious to see if they develop the idea or not.And giving this review a C+? Seems to me like someone lost their Tegridy.
I’m so impressed with their ability to surprise 23 seasons in. I did not expect Randy’s massive heel turn, but I’m here for it. And I like Tegridy Farms. You are right that the ending was a little unsatisfying, but I think a C+ was unfair. There were a lot of ideas that perhaps could have been executed ever, but I’d give this at least a B just for how unexpected and inventive it was, and for how many timely themes they were able to fit it (Thunberg/detention/vaping bans.) If this is just the tip of the iceberg, I think we’re in store for a really crazy season.
After a few seasons of this, I’d think we’d be used to the concept of a serialized season of South Park not nailing down the message in episode 1.
“What happens when you combine science with ‘tegrity?! A whole lot of magic”You’ve got to appreciate small lines like that.
They haven’t really done stand alone episodes the past few seasons. The story line will continue in the upcoming episodes. If you want episodes that have conclusions then watch the old ones.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but as far as I can tell, “in lieu of” does not mean “in order to”, but rather “instead of”.
Thus the sentence about customers leaving Randy’s business does not make much sense…!
I agree that this episode tried to put in a lot, to varying effect. I think we needed two episodes on this, to be honest with you. But I will say the “flashback sequence” is hands down one of the funniest jokes I’ve seen.
I get that the ‘Mexican Joker’ thing is both more current and easier to explain to idiot ICE COs but wouldn’t the examples of Al-Qaeda and it’s successor organizations be a better reason not to traumatize children? How will the Republicans like it when the much-feared MS-13 has a whole junior wing devoted to political terrorism against the US?
I think my favorite part of the episode is when they played some music from That’s My Bush (the saxophone bit) at the end of a commercial break.
Yeah I think a C+ is a bit harsh. Honestly if the two story lines intersected more or if they focused more on the ICE stuff, it could have been a classic episode. Definitely the best premiere in a while, I’d give it a B.
Meh. Matt & Trey can’t build a brand that like 95% of the time is “caring about stuff is dumb” and then expect me to give a shit on those rare few occasions they don’t behave like Bill Maher level douchebros, so I can’t really care when they try to be all “So yeah, keeping kids in cages is horrible, right?” Wow guys, way to go all the way out on the ledge there.
The “Mexican Joker Theory” has happened. Back in the 80’s. When the USA supported the Mujahideen and other tribes when they tried to repel the invading Soviet fighters from Afghanistan but then later abandoned them, that was the origin story of the Taliban. As in 9-11.
As someone who recently quit vaping because I was experiencing the same symptoms reported in the news, I can tell you what I know, what I believe, and a few guesses. I vaped for two years. When I started I was a smoker. I completely quit smoking about a month or less after I started vaping. Later I would bum a smoke from wife or coworker very occasionally but I didn’t like the taste anymore, and it seemed unsatisfying. I was a heavy vaper using 12mg juice in a tank system.About three months ago—after vaping for nearly two years—I started getting this nasty cough. I thought it might be the type of juice so I switched brands and flavors, but it didn’t help. I decided to make sure it was the vaping and not something else, so I “put it down.” And that’s when all these stories started appearing in the news. Wasn’t that providential? Here I wanted to quit vaping and along comes exactly the kind of news that was a real motivator. I don’t think it’s the juice that causes this. Now for the guesses. If I was investigating this I’d look at the coils. What if they’re putting fiberglass, asbestos, or some other impurity in the cotton that absorbs the about to be atomized juice? Who makes most of these vape coils? China. Who are we in a trade war with? China.What’s changed since vaping started 16 years ago? Hmmm Could that be a trade war with China?
First off, did the show start off with a 6 minute commercial break or am I crazy? I think it’s going to be hard to review these as their latest go to move is to set up season long plots so there will not always be a real payoff at the end of each episode like the stand alone ones. The mass conversion was obvious yet brilliant. Mexican Joker seems like uno mal hombre.
Cigarettes kill just under 500,000 people annually in the US.