Comments by "Seven Proxies" (@sevenproxies4255) on "Absolute Mad Lads - The Mini KillDozer" video.

John did nothing wrong. If someone tries to cheat you out of money they owe you, you should ensure that the cost of doing so far outweigh the money they should've paid you in the first place.
263
Not gonna lie.. Part of me is here for the Raid Shadow Legends introduction.
184
"Look, the people you are after are the people you depend on. We cook your meals, we haul your trash, we connect your calls, we drive your ambulances, we guard you while you sleep. Do not fuck with us."
5
@NEEDbacon Yeah, but still. Dank has pulled off an incredible marketing feat. He's made the scripted advertisement into a beloved meme. Other sponsored youtubers market Raid Shadow Legends too, but none of them has made it into a "Wait for it..."-moment like he did. 😁
2
@NameHere2243 The fact of the matter is: nobody got hurt. except the moron who wilfully put himself at risk and got blinded by diesel as a result. He hurt himself, John didn't hurt him. No harm to anyone was done. So stop bitching about "someone could've gotten hurt!" You can die from getting out of bed in the morning. Life is risk. Deal with it.
1
@godknightomega He didn't cause any financial harm to anyone else. The responsibility for the damages will befall the construction company since John was their employee. They will have to foot the bill for the property damage in the end.
1
@godknightomega Then the hotel shouldn't have hired shady contractors who refuse to pay their workers due to a "glitch". The hotel should've put pressure on the construction company saying that unless they pay out those wages, the hotel will dump them and find someone else to complete construction. It's not like making renovations or buildings require specific companies after all. Fact of the matter is, the hotel profited off wages being denied to workers. Therefore, they share the blame. Or, as you yourself put it "Financial damage does financially impact others in a roundabout sense." If John's actions supposedly hurt the Hotels finances "indirectly". Then their actions hurt John's finances indirectly in exactly the same manner. The door swings both ways.
1
@NameHere2243 You're the kind of moron that likes to advocate for heavy regulations of anything with the slightest element of risk because "someone COULD get hurt", aren't you? You're the kind of person who wants to ban smoking, alcohol, eating red meat, motorcycles, guns, certain sex acts and pretty much everything else people find exciting in life. Hate to break it to you, but the rest of us don't want to bubblewrap the entire world just because sometimes idiots "get hurt" due to their own idiocy.
1
@godknightomega The hotel shouldn've vetted the constrution company better. In case you didn't know, the construction business is quite seedy and dishonest in general. From having people doing jobs they don't have permits or licence for, to using illegal labour (immigrants or people who don't pay taxes etc.) Everybody knows it. But businesses who hire construction firms still just go with "lowest price" above all else. This business got to taste the consequences of it.
1
@godknightomega You can argue that the Hotel is a victim. But they're not a victim of John's actions. They are a victim of the construction companys shady business practices. And if they want to sue for damages, they shoule sue them rather than John. But only if the Hotel had no knowledge of the situation. If they did, but chose to do nothing about it. They are culpable as well.
1
@godknightomega If those issues stem from something I had knowledge of and profiteered from, I would't behave like some innocent victim if you did. You reap what you sow.
1
@godknightomega I don't have anger issues. Anger implies strong emotion, which I do not experience a lot of. I go by experience in this matter. The business hiring contractors always know what they're up to. I see no reason to give this particular Hotel a pass, purely for the sake of some bullshit "reasonable doubt" position.
1
@godknightomega I am not a court of law. Nor do I remember ever having been a supporter of the "innocent until proven guilty" bullshit. That usually happens when the scum of the earth are let off the hook in a daily basis, because courts worry more about some hollow "moral highground" and being autistic over technicalities, rather than the big picture and ensuring that dangerous people are put behind lock and key where they belong.
1
@godknightomega No, what i'm saying is, criminals should not be allowed to walk just because some desk clerk at the forensics office failed to sign a form properly, or because crucial evidence that clearly prove their guilt get thrown out of court because slimy defense lawyers deem the evidence to be "illegally obtained" (like a cop at a crime scene putting a murder weapon in the wrong kind of bag, or the cop found it without having a search warrant). In these instances, the criminal isn't "innocent". Yet they walk anyway, due to bureaucratic autism. What i'm also saying is that if my daughter or sister gets raped by some guy. I'm not gonna let some incompetent and ignoranr court of law decide the rapists guilt or not. I will torture and murder that rapist with my own two hands, and frankly I see nothing morally wrong about it whatsoever. None of these examples is the same thing as being "accused while innocent". So you can take that ridiculous hyperbole and shove it up your ass.
1
Payne Killer If my girl asks me if her new pants make her look fat... Then yes.
1