Talk:Pistols for Pandas

From Homestar Runner Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search


Lighter mention

Does the lighter that Crack Stuntman uses to burn the $1 bill count as an inside reference to the lighters that Strong Bad and The Cheat frequently use?

That's what I assumed. I'm surprised it's not mentioned!
Well, the fact that it's a flip-top zippo, and the fact that the bill goes up instantly in an incinerating flash are certainly reminiscent... - 21:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Capitalization of title

I moved this page to Pistols for Pandas because that's how it's listed on the Toons menu. — It's dot com 17:40, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


We find out what happened to Crack after the incedent and learn more about Pistols For Pandas. User: MICGAGUH

That's forum talk, buddy. Flicky1991 18:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

South park reference

When the stick figure of crack is eating the cereal, the way his mouth/head moves reminds me of the canadians from south park. Not sure it's strong enough of a connection for a reference or not, but thought i'd bring it up. — Defender1031*Talk 21:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

It was on the page before, but it got removed.- 22:01, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


Does the context in which Crack uses "screwed" near the beginning strike anyone else as borderline not-family-friendly? If so, is this notable? -Ingiald21:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

He got screwed out of a job... how is that context not family-friendly? — Defender1031*Talk 21:58, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Okay, maybe "context" wasn't the right word, but usually when "screw" is used as a verb that way it has sexual connotations. I dunno, it's just not something I would use in mixed company and struck me as a little odd. -Ingiald 22:16, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
You are incorrect there. It's often used as a term simply implying "cheated" or "taken advantage of". — Defender1031*Talk 22:35, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
I get that that's what it meant, but in that sense it's being used metaphorically much in like as a certain four-letter word it's serving as a euphemism for that can be used in the same way know what? I give up. At this point you either know what I'm trying to say or you don't, I don't think anything else I say is going to change things. -Ingiald 00:06, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
You are correct. Not that long ago, using "screwed" in a context other than the mechanical sense was considered vulgar. It has a sexual connotation at its roots, and it did in fact mean to be "taken advantage of," in the same sense that "taken advantage of" means that someone has taken sexual liberties without consent. It has become more acceptable of late. 17:34, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Actually, it's usage in this cartoon, "to beset with unfortunate circumstances", dates back to the 1600's, nearly one hundred years before any record of it's usage with any sexual connotation. Etymologists believe this use of this word derives from thumbscrews, torture devices that were used in that time period. 18:33, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
This isn't the first time the word "screw" has been used on The first time was sb email 22. In the context of that sbemail, it is considered to be a swear (Strong Bad says to the British "Screw all y'all."). Here, though, it's used in a less vulgar context, similar to Shopping for Danger (Gunhaver talks about weapons which can "screw with the weather"). Since the former is included on Swears but the latter is not, it would seem that Crack Stuntman isn't really swearing here, especially considering's contribution. – The Chort 18:49, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
In any case, as in many slang uses of the word screw, it's in a place where the f-bomb would also work. It's used in a sense that has historically been mildly vulgar and not family-friendly, but that is generally acceptable in many media. The thumbscrew reference is from a mostly archaic usage which referred to the use of coercion. This is a case where the modern meaning has drifted back toward a similar archaic meaning, while having no direct derivation therefrom. — (Talk | contribs) 19:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC) (left unsigned)

Cause I'm don't get the reference

Other than the concept of employment and the unusual use of 'I'm', I don't see how this is clearly a reference to Temporari-o's. Can we get a consensus on this? Flashfight 00:06, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

"I'm" incorrectly used and the word "paid" make it clear enough in my mind to be a reference. — Defender1031*Talk 00:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Wiselike. It stays. --Jay (Talk) 00:32, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Disapearing Truck

Would the truck, going into a small building, be an example of hammerspace?

I don't think so, since it's an illustration. Not part of the "real world". Elcool (talk)(contribs) 08:27, 28 April 2009 (UTC)


Okay, does it not sound like Crack says Pistols for Pandas is a "not-profit" organization, as opposed to non-profit? Thelongestpants

Nope. "non-profit" is an actual word and the second N sound is clearly audible. — Defender1031*Talk 01:04, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, yeah, I'm not an idiot. I know non-profit is a real word, but I hear "not-profit" every time. Oh well. Thelongestpants

Just thought I'd point out...

...Gunhaver is called the Cheat Commander, PROVINg he actually is the leader. I guess. -Anonny

Nope. It's just a reference to Crack Stuntman messing up Gunhaver's name. In the Easter egg, it's also a reference to that. We should make a running gag for that. Thy Not Dennis (t/c) 10:13, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Box top cash?

Did anyone notice that for the school to get a computer, Crack would have to eat 3990 boxes of cereal.

Here's my figuring: An average Dell laptop (Like the one shown in the toon) is about 399 dollars. A Box Top is worth 10 cents.

Therefore 399 divided by .10 is 3990.

That would cost 19,950 of your dollars.

Does this warrant mention on the page? --Mooman72v2 01:50, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Under Trivia, I would think. Thy Not Dennis (t/c) 19:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Feel free to edit as needed and add. -- 02:20, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
There was a very similar Fun Fact in the article at one point, which was removed for "explaining the joke", and it does, but I think showing the numbers has some merit anyway. I say that because even though the implication is plain, very few people will actually bother to do the math to see just how ridiculous the joke is, and I think it's the sort of trivia that would make the Fun Facts more fun :) The whole derivation shouldn't be put in the article (or if it is, it should be <!-- hidden -->), just a summary, e.g.:
Each pistol requires about 4000 boxes of cereal, or $20,000 of donations, meaning only about 2% of money donated is received by the beneficiary.
Note: this does not take into account the percentage of donations that are incinerated for being too small. I was guessing about $500 for a pistol. I don't really know how much one costs and a quick search shows the price range is very broad (which is also true for laptops).— 13:45, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, I assumed a basic $399 Dell laptop was used for the school, and didn't even look at the price of guns. -- 01:27, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Anytime the math is complicated, it goes on the talk page, especially if we take liberties in figuring it out. See Talk:A Folky Tale#Physics. — It's dot com 23:01, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Rose Colored Glasses

Do Crack Stuntman's Rose Colored Glasses deserve an explanation? -- 02:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

just 'cause

The final line seems to be a reference to the old fortune cookie game. The one that says: "You will fight for a just cause, just 'cause." In both cases, the word cause and the shortened version of because ('cause) are used repetitively. Anyone else think this should be noted in the article?

WAHT?! Yes! I just noticed this! I'm adding it to both articles! Loud noises! Bleu Ninja 03:20, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Oops. Someone already did. Bleu Ninja 03:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


I am trying to watch this short, but when I clicked on the link on, the toon just comes up as a frozen picture of green-shaded strips with two bamboos on the sides, with a little static-looking thing on the side. I've tried reloading my browser and the page multiple times, but the same still picture keeps coming up. Is this happening to anyone else? -- 23:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Noooooooooooooooooo... Maybe it isn't loading... OpenSourceGreg 12:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Try minimizing and then maximizing the page, that happened to me on one of the Sbemails and that worked. --Platinum789hi

Laugh at what?

"For every dollar you give to Pistols for Pandas, we laugh at" is a sentence fragment that lacks an object associated with the preposition of "at". Further, I hear another syllable after "at", which i believe to be "you", but i am not entirely sure. I do know that there has to be SOMETHING there though. I tried to add the word but got reverted almost immediately. What does everyone else think about this? — Defender1031*Talk 05:40, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't hear "you," but I agree there's another syllable there. I think it might be "it." small_logo.pngUsername-talk 05:54, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Grammatical or not, I don't hear any word after "we laugh at". — It's dot com 18:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree with It's Dot Com. There's no syllable after "at." MichaelXX2 mail_icon.gif link_icon.gif 18:20, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Also agree. Just "we laugh at", nothing more. --DorianGray 20:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Expecting to hear some small very subtle syllable or something, I played the clip in question several times (hooray for Phlip's script!) and didn't hear any second word. What some people might think to be a very brief second word at the end in fact sounds like part of Crack Stuntman's giggle. It is too short and monotone to be a word. --Stux 20:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Stux. I think he's just got a "heh" from his laughter mixed in with the "at". Listen to a slowed-down clip. — It's dot com 22:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
I thought I might have heard an "it," but that might just be me. Platinum789hi
Listening to the slowed down clip it sounds like "laugh a-hat" (a little chuckle in the middle of the word "at"). I must concede here, though i don't like it. — Defender1031*Talk 22:32, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
There's definitely two syllables there, so it's not just "laugh at". Frankly, I think Occam's razor strongly suggests that it ought to be something that makes grammatical sense, such as "laugh at it" with the "t" in "at" glottalized. It appear the pfargtling consensus says otherwise, but let me be on record that I think it's rather dumb for us to transcribe it this way when there's a much more logical explanation. Heimstern Läufer 11:17, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
While were on this, though: If we're going to transcribe it this way, with a nonsensical grammatical construction, surely we ought to have a remark or goof about this so it doesn't look like we made the mistake. (A mistake I don't believe exists, but apparently is going to show up in the transcript, anyway.) Heimstern Läufer 11:21, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Personal tools