socially-inadequate

questions anyone?   submit?   just a kid, with nothing to do, nowhere to go, and with no one to be with...
so, yea

kingdomheartsnyctophiliac:

 Kingdom Hearts Symbols Icon Set - Requested by anonymous

(via valvycat)

— 17 minutes ago with 6426 notes

caffine-addict:

nerdfighterwhatevernumbers:

letters-intertwined:

jon-snowx:

sisterheartless:

romxjul:

#he’s just mad because of the gay panic he went through

 

I WILL GO ON A RAMPAGE DON’T YOU DARE DIMINISH HIS CHARACTER ONE MORE TIME

LOOK AT WHAT HE JUST WENT THROUGH

HE ALMOST LOST HIS DEAR FRIEND 

HIS FRIEND WHO JUST SAVED HIS LIFE

AND RISKED EVERYTHING AND PRACTICALLY SINGLE HANDEDLY DEFEATED THE HUNS

AND NOW THE LAW SAYS HE HAS TO KILL THIS AMAZING PERSON

THE LAW HE WAS RAISED BY A MILITARY FAMILY AND SOCIETY TO HONOR AND RESPECT

THE LAW HE, AS A CAPTAIN OF THE ARMY, HAS PROMISED TO LIVE BY

AND IT IS SO INGRAINED IN HIM TO FOLLOW THAT LAW AND THE PUNISHMENT THAT COULD FOLLOW HIM REFUSING TO OBEY COULD BE SERIOUS

HE KNOWS WHAT HE HAS TO DO BUT THIS ISN’T JUST ANY SOLDIER, IT’S HIS FRIEND, HIS HERO

HIS FRIEND, WHOM HE THOUGHT HE KNEW, WHOM HE TRUSTED WITH HIS LIFE, HE JUST FOUND OUT HAS BEEN LYING TO HIM THE ENTIRE TIME

HE’S NOT WHO HE SAID HE WAS, HE’S NOT EVEN A HE, AND HE DOESN’T KNOW HOW TO TRUST THIS PERSON ANYMORE

IT’S STUPID, BUT HE’S CONFLICTED, AND IT HURTS

AND YOU KNOW WHAT

YOU KNOW WHAT

DO YOU EVEN SEE THE LOOK ON HIS FACE IN THE SECOND GIF

HIS DAD JUST DIED

HIS FATHER DIED YESTERDAY

IN A BATTLE HE COULDN’T EVEN GET TO SOON ENOUGH TO HELP

THEN MULAN TELLS HIM JUST WHY SHE ENTERED THE WAR

TO SAVE HER DAD FROM DYING THE SAME WAY HIS DID

AND YOU CAN SEE THAT IN HIS FACE, HOW MUCH THAT GETS TO HIM

HE IS SO CONFLICTED OVER A MILLION THINGS HERE

DO YOU HONESTLY THINK A GAY SCARE WAS THE ONLY THING GOING THROUGH HIS MIND RIGHT NOW

DO YOU!?

AMEN

(Source: rogeradcliffe, via valvycat)

— 22 minutes ago with 290251 notes
thepeoplesrecord:

The 1% wants to ban sleeping in cars - it hurts their ‘quality of life’April 16, 2014
Across the United States, many local governments are responding to skyrocketing levels of inequality and the now decades-long crisis of homelessness among the very poor … by passing laws making it a crime to sleep in a parked car.
This happened most recently in Palo Alto, in California’s Silicon Valley, where new billionaires are seemingly minted every month – and where 92% of homeless people lack shelter of any kind. Dozens of cities have passed similar anti-homeless laws. The largest of them is Los Angeles, the longtime unofficial “homeless capital of America”, where lawyers are currently defending a similar vehicle-sleeping law before a skeptical federal appellate court. Laws against sleeping on sidewalks or in cars are called “quality of life” laws. But they certainly don’t protect the quality of life of the poor.
To be sure, people living in cars cannot be the best neighbors. Some people are able to acquire old and ugly – but still functioning – recreational vehicles with bathrooms; others do the best they can. These same cities have resisted efforts to provide more public toilet facilities, often on the grounds that this will make their city a “magnet” for homeless people from other cities. As a result, anti-homeless ordinances often spread to adjacent cities, leaving entire regions without public facilities of any kind.
Their hope, of course, is that homeless people will go elsewhere, despite the fact that the great majority of homeless people are trying to survive in the same communities in which they were last housed – and where they still maintain connections. Americans sleeping in their own cars literally have nowhere to go.
Indeed, nearly all homelessness in the US begins with a loss of income and an eviction for nonpayment of rent – a rent set entirely by market forces. The waiting lists are years long for the tiny fraction of housing with government subsidies. And rents have risen dramatically in the past two years, in part because long-time tenants must now compete with the millions of former homeowners who lost their homes in the Great Recession.
The paths from eviction to homelessness follow familiar patterns. For the completely destitute without family or friends able to help, that path leads more or less directly to the streets. For those slightly better off, unemployment and the exhaustion of meager savings – along with the good graces of family and friends – eventually leaves people with only two alternatives: a shelter cot or their old automobile.
However, in places like Los Angeles, the shelters are pretty much always full. Between 2011 and 2013, the number of unsheltered homeless people increased by 67%. In Palo Alto last year, there were 12 shelter beds for 157 homeless individuals. Homeless people in these cities do have choices: they can choose to sleep in a doorway, on a sidewalk, in a park, under a bridge or overpass, or – if they are relatively lucky – in a car. But these cities have ordinances that make all of those choices a criminal offense. The car is the best of bad options, now common enough that local bureaucrats have devised a new, if oxymoronic, term – the “vehicularly housed”.
People sleeping in cars try to find legal, nighttime parking places, where they will be less apparent and arouse the least hostility. But cities like Palo Alto and Los Angeles often forbid parking between 2am and 5am in commercial areas, where police write expensive tickets and arrest and impound the vehicles of repeat offenders. That leaves residential areas, where overnight street parking cannot, as a practical matter, be prohibited.
One finds the “vehicularly housed” in virtually every neighborhood, including my own. But the animus that drives anti-homeless laws seems to be greatest in the wealthiest cities, like Palo Alto, which has probably spawned more per-capita fortunes than any city on Earth, and in the more recently gentrified areas like Los Angeles’ Venice. These places are ruled by majorities of “liberals” who decry, with increasing fervor, the rapid rise in economic inequality. Nationally, 90% of Democrats (and 45% of Republicans) believe the government should act to reduce the rich-poor gap.
It is easy to be opposed to inequality in the abstract. So why are Los Angeles and Palo Alto spending virtually none of their budgets on efforts to provide housing for the very poor and homeless? When the most obvious evidence of inequality parks on their street, it appears, even liberals would rather just call the police. The word from the car: if you’re not going to do anything to help, please don’t make things worse.
Source

thepeoplesrecord:

The 1% wants to ban sleeping in cars - it hurts their ‘quality of life’
April 16, 2014

Across the United States, many local governments are responding to skyrocketing levels of inequality and the now decades-long crisis of homelessness among the very poor … by passing laws making it a crime to sleep in a parked car.

This happened most recently in Palo Alto, in California’s Silicon Valley, where new billionaires are seemingly minted every month – and where 92% of homeless people lack shelter of any kind. Dozens of cities have passed similar anti-homeless laws. The largest of them is Los Angeles, the longtime unofficial “homeless capital of America”, where lawyers are currently defending a similar vehicle-sleeping law before a skeptical federal appellate court. Laws against sleeping on sidewalks or in cars are called “quality of life” laws. But they certainly don’t protect the quality of life of the poor.

To be sure, people living in cars cannot be the best neighbors. Some people are able to acquire old and ugly – but still functioning – recreational vehicles with bathrooms; others do the best they can. These same cities have resisted efforts to provide more public toilet facilities, often on the grounds that this will make their city a “magnet” for homeless people from other cities. As a result, anti-homeless ordinances often spread to adjacent cities, leaving entire regions without public facilities of any kind.

Their hope, of course, is that homeless people will go elsewhere, despite the fact that the great majority of homeless people are trying to survive in the same communities in which they were last housed – and where they still maintain connections. Americans sleeping in their own cars literally have nowhere to go.

Indeed, nearly all homelessness in the US begins with a loss of income and an eviction for nonpayment of rent – a rent set entirely by market forces. The waiting lists are years long for the tiny fraction of housing with government subsidies. And rents have risen dramatically in the past two years, in part because long-time tenants must now compete with the millions of former homeowners who lost their homes in the Great Recession.

The paths from eviction to homelessness follow familiar patterns. For the completely destitute without family or friends able to help, that path leads more or less directly to the streets. For those slightly better off, unemployment and the exhaustion of meager savings – along with the good graces of family and friends – eventually leaves people with only two alternatives: a shelter cot or their old automobile.

However, in places like Los Angeles, the shelters are pretty much always full. Between 2011 and 2013, the number of unsheltered homeless people increased by 67%. In Palo Alto last year, there were 12 shelter beds for 157 homeless individuals. Homeless people in these cities do have choices: they can choose to sleep in a doorway, on a sidewalk, in a park, under a bridge or overpass, or – if they are relatively lucky – in a car. But these cities have ordinances that make all of those choices a criminal offense. The car is the best of bad options, now common enough that local bureaucrats have devised a new, if oxymoronic, term – the “vehicularly housed”.

People sleeping in cars try to find legal, nighttime parking places, where they will be less apparent and arouse the least hostility. But cities like Palo Alto and Los Angeles often forbid parking between 2am and 5am in commercial areas, where police write expensive tickets and arrest and impound the vehicles of repeat offenders. That leaves residential areas, where overnight street parking cannot, as a practical matter, be prohibited.

One finds the “vehicularly housed” in virtually every neighborhood, including my own. But the animus that drives anti-homeless laws seems to be greatest in the wealthiest cities, like Palo Alto, which has probably spawned more per-capita fortunes than any city on Earth, and in the more recently gentrified areas like Los Angeles’ Venice. These places are ruled by majorities of “liberals” who decry, with increasing fervor, the rapid rise in economic inequality. Nationally, 90% of Democrats (and 45% of Republicans) believe the government should act to reduce the rich-poor gap.

It is easy to be opposed to inequality in the abstract. So why are Los Angeles and Palo Alto spending virtually none of their budgets on efforts to provide housing for the very poor and homeless? When the most obvious evidence of inequality parks on their street, it appears, even liberals would rather just call the police. The word from the car: if you’re not going to do anything to help, please don’t make things worse.

Source

(via limb000h)

— 23 minutes ago with 6582 notes

guy:

"hey! you can only have one!!"

image

(Source: guy, via horrorpandas)

— 25 minutes ago with 134975 notes

blessedarethewarriors:

demonhamster:

she is SIXTEEN

she also got shot in the HEAD and LIVED

(Source: stupidfuckingquestions, via noro-stole)

— 25 minutes ago with 722723 notes
9gag:

This kid was a toaster for Halloween

9gag:

This kid was a toaster for Halloween

(via noro-stole)

— 36 minutes ago with 271221 notes

horrorpandas:

Ugh this scene fucking got me. I’m forever pissed that the wind rises didn’t win best animation. Frozen looks like shit compare to this.

(Source: degenerationofhuman)

— 37 minutes ago with 159 notes

tsun-chun:

Itsu demo sagashite iru yo dokka ni kimi no sugata o
I'm always searching, for your figure to appear somewhere
— 17 hours ago with 15 notes
horrorpandas:

kosovan:

braiker:

Are you fucking kidding me? Did we all just wake up in 1938?

Anti-Semitism isn’t a problem anymore though right??

to the people who say history is boring and see no point in learning about it. history DOES REPEAT ITSELF 

horrorpandas:

kosovan:

braiker:

Are you fucking kidding me? Did we all just wake up in 1938?

Anti-Semitism isn’t a problem anymore though right??

to the people who say history is boring and see no point in learning about it. history DOES REPEAT ITSELF 

— 17 hours ago with 51039 notes