Comments by "Sisu Guillam" (@sisuguillam5109) on "Australian Surfers HUNTED Down After Disaster Stunt" video.

  1. It is not about pollution in this case. The motion of the waves damaged the buildings. And they were driving fast and endangering traffic in an area where no private traffic is allowed.
    2
  2. It's like riding a bike through the Louvre. There is no private traffic on that part of Venice for very good reasons.
    2
  3. Considering that it is highly damaging to the buildings and dangerous as eff... does it still look like fun?
    2
  4. You not understanding why this is an issue is a problem - thankfully one easily solved by reading.
    2
  5.  @chrisalexthomas  would you skate through an exhibition of anciant pottery?
    2
  6. Recreational vehicles are not allowed.
    2
  7. Highly regulated public traffic is allowed.
    2
  8.  @cfosnock  Mate... it is the Venice-version of one.
    2
  9. Mate... that stretch is not open to private traffic. Speed limits apply. And no waves? What?
    1
  10. No private traffic is allowed in that part of Venice. All traffic going through there is highly regulated. Would you motorbike through the Louvre just because people walk through it?
    1
  11.  @davidgarland2533  No. Not kidding. Traffic is highly regulated and strictly limited. There is no private traffic going through there. Different kind of waves cause different kids of damage. Imagine if private traffic were allowed and tourists did this all the time (or people living there).
    1
  12. Tell me you know nothing about conservation laws without saying 'I know nothing about conservation laws'. Do you skate through the Louvre?
    1
  13.  @jimmychonga5054  giant boats do not go through there. It is public traffic only and highly regulated.
    1
  14. Why?
    1
  15. The law is not dumb. You are being unklare of the law and it's reasoning does not mean it is dumb.
    1
  16. Speed. Not stickig to traffic rules. And the waves from traffic is a problem.
    1
  17.  @skunkjobb  Mate, it is not open to private traffic and the waves differ. The, are on a streich of Canal that is not open to anything but highly regulated traffic.
    1
  18. They were not hurting a world heritage site by breaking laws protecting the site? And they did endanger traffic.
    1
  19. People living in Venice care. People who understand what a heritage site is care.
    1
  20. Legends? Does your family know you think endangering traffic and damaging a world heritage site makes you a legend?
    1
  21. Would you say that if someone drove through your national heritage site?
    1
  22. So you didn't see the wake? And you are ignoring the traffic laws regulating that stretch of the Canal why?
    1
  23. So you caused damage to a world heritage site? Wow. You need to reconsider your life choices.
    1
  24. Erm... you are allowed to have an opinion on things you know nothing about... but do you think it wise to post said opinion?
    1
  25. Says you. The people living in Venice and those of us who value Venice think otherwise.
    1
  26.  @WhyIHatetheWorld  you beed to read up on a subject before posting.
    1
  27. Drunk typing is a bad bad bad idea.
    1
  28. It is not open to public traffic for very good reasons. And you do understand that they could have been sucked under the building had they fallen? Oh, wait... you know nothing about Venice and yet here you are.
    1
  29. Uuuhhh... tha Those laws exist? That's why it was illegal to do as they did.
    1
  30. It is a world heritage site. The waves do cause damage to the buildings. Once you are in the water you can be swept under the buildings.
    1
  31.  @photowarriorfundamentalfre3526  Mate... private traffic is not allowed. It is a world heritage site.
    1
  32. Eh?
    1
  33. Do you understand what a world heritage site is?
    1
  34. You okay?
    1
  35. Yes.
    1
  36. Not even remotely the same. Nice try, russian troll.
    1
  37. Please, take the to a library.
    1
  38.  @ickerish  it is a world heritage site.
    1
  39.  @dicruz8536  I doubt a nunnery would take them.
    1
  40. Yes. Now move on.
    1
  41. You having seen worse things in Venice makes this okay how?
    1
  42.  @hieronymus..bosch8532  which part of highly regulated public traffic eludes you?
    1
  43. You can clearly see that they are indeed making waves. They could easily have been sucked under the buildings had they have fallen. There is no private traffic allowed in that part of Venice either.
    1
  44. No private traffic in that part of Venice. Conservation laws. Reckless driving. Just for starters.
    1
  45. It's highly regulated public traffic. And Venice is trying to find solutions to regulate traffic even further to protect Venice.
    1
  46. You do understand that this is like riding a motorbike through the Louvre?
    1
  47. Do you need to read up on efforts to conserve the world heritage site that is Venice? Oh, you do.
    1
  48.  @Chrisjude100  in is illegal. There is no private traffic in that part of Venice.
    1
  49. And that is slander.
    1
  50. They are causing a wake. There is no private traffic in that part of Venice. Speed limits apply and all traffic is highly regulated. Falling of that thing could lead to being swept under the buildings.
    1
  51. Don't be silly.
    1
  52. Damaging a world heritage site, endangering traffic...
    1