Skip to main content

Happy April Fool's Day, says the anti-prankster

With it being April Fool's Day and all, I wonder what it is that makes so many people love pranks. I, myself, have never been a fan of them.

Pranks involve taking somebody by surprise with a premeditated act that's often times recorded for the pranksters' own amusement. In many cases, the victims of the premeditated acts are complete strangers of the pranksters. These acts have led to embarrassment, injury, and even death.

Yet, even with all the risks involved, many morning radio shows go the way of the adolescent in making prank phone calls, and there seems to be more prankster shows on television now than there are educational programs. With the growing number of "reality" shows and the like, I have a difficult time seeing this trend subsiding anytime in the near future, unfortunately.

The thing I dislike most about pranks is the fact real living people are affected by them. This isn't like a TV sitcom or a stand-up comedy routine, where the show or act won't inflict any potential harm on the viewers (unless the comedian is Dane Cook, of course). These acts are often times very cruel and provide the victims an incredible shock, at least initially. This is all comedy to the pranksters and viewers, but not to the people whom are actually front and center of the prank. When real living people can be negatively impacted by an act on multiple fronts, including possible death, then in my opinion, that act can't be construed as comedy, and the only "fools" aren't the victims of the prank, but the perpetrators themselves.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...