Ninja and/or Pirate

Choose, or dont, whatever :smiley:

ninja, i think they are cooler.

I actually wrote an essay on this for lit class once. If I find it, I’ll post it as an attachment. I voted for both, because they’re both awesome.

u do got a piont, i just think a ninja would win.

That depends on several factours:

  1. The location and conditions of the battle.
  2. What type and era of Ninja this is.
  3. What pirate crewman this is (i.e. A cabin boy wouldn’t stand much of a chance)
  4. What they’re both armed with.
  5. If they’re ‘playing fair.’ (i.e. Neither one has a sniper waiting in the trees)

A pirate is just someone who steals stuff. So I’m gonna say a ninja would beat a mall punk.

Unless the mall-punk is robbing from a ship, or plundering the land from a ship without permission from his government, he isn’t a pirate.

Also, Charle is referring to swashbuckling pirates.

Shock. Shock and amazement. Shock at the fact that, on a website where we talk about playing games with a heavily Japanese influence, that Ninja would break the laws of reality and beat Pirate. Shock, amazement, and awe.

The only thing pirates are good at is catching scurvy and shooting cannon balls. Fuck pirates. :stuck_out_tongue: I am not a fan of real ultimate power, and all that shit, but one faithful idiosyncracy I have when it comes to being a ninja is knowing my enemy; fuck pirates. :stuck_out_tongue:

You should tell that to the US Government :smiley: They think differently.

Ninja w00t!!

Well, I know the truth. Me and Sid Meier, we’ll always know the truth.

They also think it’s less moral to light a plant on fire in my mouth than for a football player to murder his wife in cold blood. Fuck them.

I really don’t think i can agree on this one. Normally, ninja would take it hand’s down, seeing as they get to use bad-ass weapons, dress like a mo-fo and run along walls and all that jazz. however, don’t ninja have to follow orders? That’s where the freedom of swashbuckling comes into play. Your very own ship and lots of treasure and rum. Ja-ha! plus, you get to chill in the caribbean with Keira knightley.

Oh. You mean OJ Simpson? The guy that was prosecuted by the government (California state government actually, I believe. Not federal), but was acquitted by a jury? You know, a group of people that aren’t necessarily government workers?

Pirate because of the originality of the female Pirate leader-Faris- in Final Fantasy 5.and Pirate because my favorite ride at Disneyland is Pirates of the Carribean.and Pirate because it is the name of a really cool record label-----

NINJA PIRATE! :smiley:



  1. Who failed to prosecute properly?
  2. Who was responsible for appointing the jury?
  3. Who was responsible for being sure the jury was unbiased?
  4. I can give other examples of why I don’t give a shit about what our government says if this isn’t good enough, still.

The 984 is right, OJ was prosecuted by California, not the federal government (no reason to do it federal). Also, the government’s ban on smokingcertain things and the age to smoke other things is completely different from a criminal prosecution.

  1. Marica Clark led the prosecution for the State of California
  2. The prosecution and the defense
  3. The prosecution and the defense

You’re still young, and some states do things slightly different, but jury is pulled from the surrounding community. Then, out of all the people that show up at the court house, some are selected to go to a vior dire (spelling?) where both the prosecution and defense question the jury to find out about the jury. They can then dismiss jurors for a variety of reasons. They do this until they get 24 jurors (12 for the case and 12 back-ups). That is why the answer for 2 and 3 are the same. The judge pretty much just supervises. You also have to keep in mind that OJ had good attorney’s who took some smart moves (such as the change of venue).