Everywhere The Deaf Are Befuddled
Submitted by: Found online. via deMotivational Builder
Add this to your blog:
(Copy & paste code)
You May Like:
« Previous But It Looks So Happy! | I'm Glad They're Not Mine Next »
Add this to your blog:
» See all 40 comments
-
Recent Comments
Beatdown on HOBO SO HOMELESS Tahiti on GAY VAMPIRE PR0N Beatdown on BORKED ehw on BILL WATERSON WumBoWamBo on WAIT -
Actually, arsonists generally do ejaculate while watching fires that they’ve lit. Sad, disgusting, but true.
Ah, the voice of experience!
Pwnage
I know u have first hand expireince with that
Arsonists? Anyone who lights a fire and destroys property on purpose is an arsonist. “Pyromaniac” would be a better term, and “often” would be better than “generally”.. Just sayin’
What is this a picture of?
Anon, you are an idiot
Actually, anon isn’t far from the truth. Arsonists do get a thrill out of lighting fires.
Well, ejaculating can also be used for when some one screams out suddenly…but I’m spoiling the fun.
What I really want to know is what they were acutally saying, and how that THAT got mixed in…
And how exactly do the firefighters deal with that kind of problem?
A few porno’s come to mind when trying to think of the solution.
they have a big ass blast of cold water YOU figure it out
They turn their long hoses on them and squirt them in the eye.
@Chris
After years of reading captions, I’m betting the people were “evacuating.”
Which, considering some of the definitions of that word, could be pretty unacceptable too…
Wow ur a real expert at reading captions!
lol, i like how you point out that evacuating is also a filthful term
they were evacuating themselves on the streets lol
I suppose he firefighters should just hose them down with cold water like granny used to do to the dog when it was in heat… that would solve the ejac problem and then they could get back to the fire…
PJ – I don’t know about every other guy our there, but ejaculating is a substantially farstep from “getting a thrill,” anon is still an idiot, and so are you.
They were saying evacuating, I’d imagine. Live captions are produced either through stenography (syllable based shorthand on a specialised machine) or voice recognition, so similar words occasionally end up transmitting.
Okay… It was probably speech to text captions that most news stations have given the unscheduled nature of their programs. The computer probably wrote ejaculating when the anchorman actually said “evacuating”. Anon isn’t an idiot, arsonists DO get off. Whatever that means is probably varied from one to another…
its supposed to be “eVacuating”…
I’m kinda concerned why the CC system even has that word in its dictionary
Now now, lets not forget about the lucrative market for closed captioned pornography
that actualy made me laugh out loud
@ Hmmm – Wow, you’re quite the negative person. That aside, I think anon and pj’s argument is perfectly valid. I mean, if there are murderers who have sex with the corpses of their victims, I’m sure that there are arsonists who like to masturbate watching their fires.
Neither were presenting an argument, they were holding out an opinion of theirs as fact. I’ll acknowledge that there is or has been an arsonist or a small number that perhaps did get some sort of sexual gratification in one way or another out of the fires they start, but it is absurd to make a statement that this is the case for anything over a significantly small number.
I am generally a negative person, and usually keep it to myself, but stupidity bothers me
Actually, Anon is correct. When I went to arson investigation school, we were taught to take notice of the crowd at fires… specifically at people that were a “bit too drawn in” by the fire or people with wet spots on their crotch area. They get off by watching and setting the fires, they don’t have to physically masturbate. Sick, but true.
As for the caption… I’m sure it was a typo by the computer…
Thanks for adding more info on the subject. I have learnt from stories from a retired policeman I know that arsonists can ejaculate while watching fires. One of the reasons that happens is because it gives them a sense of power. Some arsonists are even full-time or volunteer fire fighters and set fires only to fight them later so that they can either be closer to the fire or so that they’d be seen as a hero.
@Bystander, fire fighters don’t deal with it. That’s left up to the police.
@Hmmm, I’m not presenting an argument. While information on this subject isn’t easy to come by, at least try to get as much info about a subject before discounting what someone has said entirely. Otherwise it won’t be someone else’s stupidity that bothers you.
I think it’s supposed to be evacuating. Another great caption is: “Closed Captioning brought to you by Penthouse Letters”
@anon – I never said you were presentig an argument, just rebutting lance’s mischaracterization of your comment. And while I admit I am no authority in the topic of arson, I am confident your representation that arsonist ‘generally’ ejaculate while watching fires they lit is a gross over-exaggeration. I never said or implied that such events have never happened, just that you are an idiot for implying that this was the situation in most cases. I’m sure your retired policeman friend would agree arsonists that get this sort of pleasure from their fires is the exception, not the rule.
@ pa ff – how many arson cases have you or your department encountered where the arsonist committed the crime for some sort of pleasure? Can you really say that number is anything other than minuscule compared to the number of arsonists with revenge or secondary gain motives?
Actually, it’s not an exception or a rule. It’s more like an M.O. for arsonists. And arsonists can often be pyromaniacs, who do find pleasure in lighting the fires. Obviously there are other reasons that you mentioned.
And if there is someone ejaculating in a crowd in front of the fire, chances are that that person is the arsonist.
Not trying to argue here, just making a point. =)
For the most part I agree with what you said, as for the exception or rule comment, that was a figure of speech. My point of contention this whole time has been simply anon’s misrepresentation of the frequency of said events. I understand that events such as those you, and others above, have described have occurred and do occur enough at least that firefighters are taught about it while training. What I have been saying is that the number of arsonists that ejaculate in connection to their fires is substantially low, especially when compared to other motives. Any representation that this number even comes close to the number of arsonists with different motives is a blatant misrepresentation of facts, or a flat out fabrication.
Wait… are we ACTUALLY having an intellectual discussion here?!
Oh, I’m not surprised — the tone of comments here is generally a lot better than at, say, FailBlog.
.
But my .02: it is true that *pyromaniacs* suffer from a psychological sexual disorder in which they obtain sexual release by watching a fire that they have lit. However not all arsonists, nor even the majority, are pyromaniacs. In fact while the term “pyromania” is often loosely used to mean anyone who sets fires for enjoyment, or for no discernible purpose, true sexual pyromania is actually quite rare. According to a course I did once (sorry, no refs except for my notes), more than 20 different systems exist for classifying arsonist motives, but one typical set is:
.
a. Vandalism: nearly always by teenagers, acting in a group; accounts for about half of all arsons. May be combined with or lead to thrill-seeking as a lone arsonist.
.
b. Concealment of Evidence of another crime
.
c. Revenge: surprisingly, this is the most common motive for arsonists who strike repeatedly, because these arsonists often have mental incapacities which cause them to resort to the same method again and again to express their anger.
.
d. Political or Religious Extremism: typically by a loner who is unable to obtain explosives, but some groups such as ALF and ELF deliberately use arson because the press treats it more sympathetically than bombings. Extremists usually seek publicity and do not conceal their motives.
.
e. Profit (usually for insurance fraud, but can also include elimination of competition, getting around planning laws, etc.) The frequency of this type varies with economic cycles. It is thought that the overwhelming majority of vehicle fires are of this type.
.
f. Excitement – especially dangerous because it tends to start small and grow as the arsonist becomes bored with smaller fires. There are subcategories:
– thrillseeker: the most common
– attention seeker, a.k.a the “Hero Syndrome”: a bored or frustrated emergency services worker who feels disrespected and craves the admiration that comes from dealing with a crisis. The offender will often provide the first report, or arrive first at the scene, with statistically improbable frequency.
– true pyromaniac: achieves sexual release from the “power” of creating a fire. Much talked about but actually quite rare; less than 1% of convicted arsonists are pyromaniacs.
.
Various profiles of “typical” arsonists have been published but they should be treated with care. They are based on convicted arsonists, and the conviction rates vary considerably with the arson type (e.g. the revenge-seeking arsonist is much more likely to be convicted than the insurance fraudster), consequently these profiles are likely to be badly skewed.
I am Pleasure you
Ladder 69
Hmm it’s fake… It is evacuating, the person who created it just took the J from “Just”. If you notice the ‘J’ doesn’t look right and it’s also not completely parallel. But the rest of the jumble makes sense, captions tend to cut out certain words.
How would that explain the extra letter? Would it then be, “evaculating”? Yeh alright then.
Being someone who is hard of hearing… I hate how inaccurate and confusing the captions are…. and sometimes you really do get strange crap like that.
I think firefighter is a pretty cool guy. Eh shoots ejaculators and doesn’t afraid of anything.