GUESS WHAT THEY’RE BANNING FROM THE INTERNET! So Stupid…

'sup you beautiful bastards? hope you're having a fantastic Tuesday welcome back to the Philip DeFranco show and let's just jump in to it and the first thing I wanna about today is the UK because the UK is setting up to ban something very interesting and that is "non-conventional porn" while part of the digital economy bill is aimed at making adult websites verify the age of its users and they don't do that the government would ban and block that content, but people are freaking out because it would also go as far to ban non-conventional porn ok, so here, let me explain that.

The BBFC: the British Board of Film Classification, is responsible for vetting adult content, and certifying adult content sold via DVD Now there's strict rules as far as what they allow.

And the things they have banned: uh, gags, uh, any any kind of like physical interaction that might leave a mark so if you slap the booty regardless of whether it's real or simulated or if it's consensual that's banned.

The penetration of an object deemed likely to cause physical harm.

" That includes things like pool cues.

There's something called the four finger rule.

That rule limits the number of digits that can be inserted into an orifice for pleasure Because at a now-defined point, that becomes fisting which is also banned.

Spitting, hair-pulling, gagging, strong verbal abuse.

And there's more.

Well under the new rules of the bill the BBFC would now be responsible for all porn online.

So if there was something that could not be featured on a DVD it can no longer be featured on the internet and would thus be banned.

So there are a lot of people that are against this saying that this goes against freedom of speech and freedom of expression and most of the arguments I've seen for the ban have been "we have to protect the children.

" And this is also brought up other issues not including the fact that you're banning things that technically people could legally do to each other consensually in your country at the age of 16.

You can't see it but you can do it! But also there's the question of could this really be enforced and is there potential for this going even worse? What I mean by that is it would be simple if you block just porn websites.

I mean, if you're just gonna ban fetish websites that's pretty simple but what about a lot of the places that have a lot of different types of content? I mean obviously you'll have places like 4chan /b/, but I'm talking about like Tumblr.

Tumblr, yes, there are places that it's like all look it's like cute fandoms for like Doctor Who or anime and cutsey aw having a rough monday gifs.

But then there's also an immense about pornography Twitter, even though they come under fire for free speech stuff they're pretty lax when it comes to adult material of course massive places like Reddit which yes you can go for world news you can go for whatever but then there's a lot of adult themed stuff so if this goes through, is the UK going to shut Reddit down, are they actually going to censor all of Reddit? Meanwhile anyone the UK willing to google VPN will still be able to access that material.

I mean talking about this my opinion is I feel like this censorship is stupid.

It's not really protecting the children, you're, you're banning adults from seeing what they can legally do that's a little bit crazy now the silver lining in this situation is that if people speak up, this law can be amended it is not officially a law yet, but as it stands, if it continues to move forward this could be a huge problem.

But I also want to pass that question on to you – do you think that this ban does make sense, it doesn't? I have my opinion I'd love to know yours whether it agrees with mine or not.

and then want to talk about that story about the guy who punched a kangaroo that story's blown up this week the video blew up; these guys were on a pig hunting trip all the sudden out of nowhere the dog gets captured by a kangaroo.

The kangaroo essentially as a dog in a headlock and that's when the guy runs over, he's now been identified as Greg Tunkin and he punches the kangaroo in the face and the reaction from the stunned kangaroo is my favorite thing in the world because it's like you fucking what mate? he then hops off.

If you havent seen the video I'll link to it down below.

I'm not showing it here because it's been licensed by one of those groups that loves to take down my videos when they get a chance well the reason I'm talking about it now is it's more than just a viral video, like uh, this weird thing, after this blew up people called for Greg Tonkin to be fired that's because once his name got out people found out they actually worked for a zoo as an elephant keeper.

Standout Claire Fryer, campaign coordinator of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals said if the kangaroo has my dog in a headlock, could kill my dog if you don't know how strong kangaroos are just google it.

Hell yeah, pop that thing in the face, although I don't know if I would do it because kangaroos are scary as hell you ever see kangaroos fight? You do not want to be kicked by them.

So as a dog lover respectfully Miss Claire Fryer I want you to go fuck yourself, and I want to give big props to the zoo where he works at who said that they are not going to fire him, saying also if I'm mispronouncing things I'm sorry.

Side note – I know Conor McGregor's always looking to make history, I say UFC 210 enough of this you're gonna box Floyd Mayweather business, you fight a kangaroo I'd not only watch it, I'd start a GoFundMe for that right now then in airline news United Airlines announced they're offering a new ticket, it's called basic economy and it seems pretty much be the same except that you are banned from using overhead compartments.

Now the way that United Airlines are spinning this is hey look it's a cheaper option we're making it more affordable but really what we've always seen on these changes, sooner or later what we see is that this new thing this cheaper thing becomes the new normal and then we're just paying extra fees they're of course 100-percent in the right to do this they're trying to stay competitive they think this is a smart move is going to add a billion dollars in new revenue, but it is also granted people like myself the reason to inform my viewers that United Airlines is by far the worst airline I have ever been on granted the last few times I flew United, maybe they were outlier experiences, not the great normal service but simply how rude and dumb everyone involved was was it was it was amazing the flight was already delayed one hour which that that's whatever, sometimes there are just delays small seats stewardess was rude to me, we were late another hour because the pilot, the pilot couldn't get his iPad to work, the other United employees close the door to the plane without permission from the crew they're taking a flashlight trying to get the attention of the people at the gate saying hey please open the plane door that takes another 10-20 minutes we end up leaving I think an hour, hour 10 after we were supposed to even after the other delay long story short the shit show continued and I wasn't even angry I was just like I was just amazed at how stupid everything was the thing that'll suck about this situation is that if it's even mildly successful you can 100-percent expect other airlines to adopt things that are similar and while some have called for the government to step in, I, I think that that is that is the government overstepping their bounds I think this comes down to just purely consumers.

If you think that this is ridiculous do not support them with your money.

It's as simple as that.

Companies don't make decisions based off of their hearts and what they think is right, they make decisions based off of how it affects their wallet so let's affect their wallet then a bunch of you want me to chime in on the Forbes 2016 list of highest-paid YouTubers at the bottom of the list they had Rhett and Link and Miranda Sings at five million dollars, followed by German Garmendia, then Markiplier then Tyler Oakley and Rosanna Pansino at six million a pop then Smosh at seven million Lilly Singh aka Superwoman at 7.

5 million Roman Atwood at eight million and don don don don as expected PewDiePie at the top of the list making what they estimate to be 15 million dollars once again, I do want to point out that as much research as Forbes seems to do, their numbers are wrong this is just based off of behind-the-scenes knowledge I have while the people on this list most likely did make a crap ton of money I'm just I'm just saying, Forbes is doing the best they can but there's, there's a lot more play and that's, that's really the most I can say legally although a thing I do want to point out – I, I'm not talking about me, I, I would not be on this list and then let's talk about what I find to be the most ridiculous story today and that is the story around officer Michael Slager and you may remember that name because he is the man who shot and killed Walter Scott Mr.

Scott was stopped by the officer and he unlawfully fled and that interaction resulted in the death of Walter Scott which was actually shown on camera I am going to censor the footage but please keep in mind that this is going to be very hard to watch (gun shots) so unarmed and very far away, Walter Scott shot in the back multiple times resulting in his death.

And I know there are people that rightfully will say you should never run away from the police and I agree with that but the punishment should not be instant death.

Unarmed, posed no threat, shot in the back, killed and the thing is, in my opinion this is something officer Slager is obviously aware of because he is caught on camera lying because that footage I showed you continues to record and has now been paired with the police scanner audio 243 just had shots fired, subject is down, he grabbed my taser so he says 'he grabbed my taser' which shows oh man this guy was definitely a threat that's why I had to put him down but then while still being filmed he runs back to where his taser fell, he picks it up, then bringing it back to the body in front of the other officer dropping it near the body and in the official police reports, they say they perform CPR on him but the only thing documented whether it be on video or in the audio is them hand-cuffing the man they've now shot in the back multiple times now all that happened April fourth 2015 and the reason I'm talking about it today is its back in the news because the officer who killed that man has not been convicted of murder.

He was on trial, everything was pointing towards a guilty verdict but they have now come back with a mistrial according to reports there was just one person on the jury not willing to put out a guilty verdict, everyone else was saying guilty but there was just one hold out that would not change their mind no matter what.

The lone holdout saying to the judge I cannot and will not change my mind.

And honestly I'm just lost here I don't understand how this happens there are a lot of times that there are shootings that I think that there is a question was maybe reaching for something, was there an imminent threat, but he shot this man from 18 feet away in the back even during the trial despite there being video evidence, officer Slager testified that Scott yanked his taser out of his hands during the struggle and then charged towards him with the weapon making the officers scared for his life saying at that point I pulled my firearm and pulled the trigger I fired until the threat was stopped as I was trained to do.

What are you talking about?? Do black people and/or people over the age of 50 have guns that pop out of their back and shoot at you? Not only is there video evidence but the coroner said he was shot in the back, he wasn't charging at the officer.

Then despite there being video evidence that he took the taser and then dropped it near the body, he said he didn't remember doing that ok that's fine, but there's video evidence showing you doing that officer Slager of his own testimony said that I was shooting to kill as I was trained to stop a threat spowe know that there was intent to kill and we also know thanks to video evidence that Walter Scott was shot in the back the first time while 18 feet away.

There's no question and really the only potential good news here is that while justice has not been served it may have only been delayed.

Prosecutors have said that due to the mistrial they will try to get a new trial as fast as possible and I do hope that happens sooner than later because I know while the family has been speaking to the press and has talked about remaining peaceful and staying strong and believing in the system this is ridiculous if the worst of police officers are not held accountable that's what most people will think of all police officers.

This is just a disgrace in my opinion that's actually I'm going to end today's show remember if you like this video, you like what I do on this channel, hit that like button, if you new here, hit that subscribe button, if it's working today but that said, of course, as always, my name's Philip DeFranco, you've just been Phil'd in, I love yo' faces and I'll see you tomorrow.

Source: Youtube