Stash

I had a really great sandbox moment a few days ago. I had gotten into a taxi and was scrolling through the list of destinations when the cab was rear ended by another car. The car then sped off, at which point I was "kicked" out of the cab as it sped off to chase the fleeing car. I was left standing in the road watching the cab give chase as it sideswiped a pedestrian and knocked her over, and then a squad car came from behind my field of view to join in, almost running me over as well. It was a fantastic little sequence.

Well according to the last episode they have 300 keys, each of which is good for 4 more giftings? so 1500 keys? I would volunteer to take one and gift to 4 or 5 other people if I am understanding correctly. Steam name solidstash I promise I wont try to horde all the fruitcakes in an attempt to drive up the demand for them...

I remember one very specific detail about the original ... that my brother and I got stuck at a door and were never able to advance. 2 Days later it went back to the video rental place, creating one of my earliest memories of failure... perhaps this is my chance for redemption? Now i finally understand why they named it flashback.

I really enjoyed everything about the first episode. Even though seemingly unnerving at some points, the spooky atmospheric style never really had me concerned that I was ever in danger of having something jump out at me, which I tend to not mind when I am playing games that call for it. Even the small addition of the horse shoe indicator added a nice touch to the style. Really looking forward to the next installment.

Yes... As I mentioned earlier, it did happen.

oh geez Not to mention this happened over the weekend... such an awesome display or responsible gun ownership.

Simply put, they are (arming themselves in preparation, not owning WMD's and heavy artillery) and if every hillbilly could have an Apache, believe me, it would be parked in their front lawn right next to the broken down car they use for target practice. But none of those would be practical for defending against a home invasion, where as an AR in the hands of a trained individual is very practical. I wish there was. I am sure it was still up there, we had all of the firearms from WWII as well as the arms race gearing up between us and Russia. But probably not at nearly a 1 to 1 ratio, which is pretty mind boggling. I did like that Bill Hicks clip, I saw that documentary about him but haven't checked out much of his other standup, but now it is on my list. But by this analogy, its not the drunk driving they want to make illegal, its corvettes because they are faster and thusly more dangerous. Or school buses because they have a high capacity for people and more people = more mass =more force = more possible destruction if out of control. Evil, evil schoolbuses.

I appreciate that we see this from different sides of the fence, and I am just happy that I can have an actual discussion about this. The points I was trying to make was that the gun owning population sees an attempted disarmament as a step towards the government having free reign to infringe on any liberty we have. Being armed with muskets and choosing to stand up against tyranny was how this country was created, and many gun owners feel that the second amendment is the foundation on which the rest of the constitution stands. Without the ability to stand up against the government in the event they try to infringe on liberty, we are no longer a free nation. And i know earlier in this thread the argument was made that the government has tanks and drones etc. but as it stands it is merely another common set of checks and balances that creates fear-based trust between citizen and governing body... not the best trust relationship, but the one the country was created with and therefore one that it continues to have. Any gun control initiative that helps keep guns in the hands of the responsible and out of the hands of the insidious I am all for. This is what we should be doing, but of course some on the right will ridicule anything Obama does because they are unable to look at it from any other position than their own, which happens on the left as well. Any gun ban on a type of gun because it is scary and has become a symbol of this type of tragic violence is a convenient solution that will accomplish nothing but creating more of a rift between those who are comfortable with guns being in society and those that are not. I am comfortable with guns being in the hands of the police because I am a law abiding citizen, but I would not be comfortable with the guns being in the hands of the police and government if I wasn't afforded the same rights. That is a level of trust for government and elected officials that I simply don't have, and I know I am not alone. Maybe we can remove it from future equations? possibly, but there really seems to be some underlying causes here that should be the main focus. In the fifties there were many gun ranges and gun clubs within schools, and teenagers were taught to use them responsibly while the term school shooting hadn't even become a thing yet. B - Surely less guns will reduce the amount of gun violence? I would agree, but as i mentioned less guns means disarmament, and this has the potential to turn into something much worse. C - Who would you suggest blaming instead? I don't have an answer to this, I just think that blaming and banishing a tool is a step in the wrong direction. If I get a DUI, I do not blame my car for not driving straighter. I know if I were the parent of a child like this I would blame myself, regardless of his age...especially if he used my weapon. And that picture is scary to me. Not because of the gun, but because of the Buzz Lightyear Mousepad.

I am saying that the singling out assault weapons is merely a tactic for the prez to get us past this as a country, because he knows that any other gun legislation will never get past congress, and chances are neither will an assault weapons ban. He just wants to be able to say "well i tried." and move on. The reason everyone is so scared of AR-15's is because it is meant to be a scary looking weapon, but in reality it is no different than any other semi automatic weapon except that when you see someone with it you automatically think "military specific". I honestly don't mind heightening the requirements for gun ownership, but those requirements are never going to test whether you are a competent parent who can recognize if your child is exhibiting emotional or psychological problems. If parents feel the need to buy a gun to protect their family, I would think they would be able to recognize a child having a tough time in the time period leading up to something like this and get them some help. But that is besides the point that banning a specific type of gun is placing blame on the gun and not on the individuals involved, which A, is way to late to remove from the equation, B wont change the staggering amount of gun violence and C is opening the door to placing blame on other outside factors like Video Games. Assault weapons, just as handguns have one purpose: Defense... Matter of fact, In this state I cannot hunt with anything besides a shotgun. The practical purpose is it is accurate and scary looking, things that attribute to its effectiveness. But as you can see, it is by far and away not the scariest gun/round... (please disregard the fox news, this showed up on my feed and I think the firearm comparison is very effective.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=V2wBiG3LCx0

I have been following this post since yesterday, but was reluctant to post as I know I am in the minority. Thanks Jeremy for at least trying to see if from the other side and understand where conservatives are coming from, although many go about defending their views with some pretty poor arguments. I don't believe guns are the problem either, and this is why: At some point in the history of the U.S. preventative measures (gun control) could have been taken but we are long past that point now with our long love affair with guns. I don't have the statistics, but modern day sport rifles or "assault" rifles make up for a ridiculously small percentage of the gun crime in America. Incidents like the one in December are outliers, as are the perpetrators committing these mass shootings. It doesn't make them any less tragic, I just think that this is a attempt to shut up the masses yelling for gun control who don't really understand that legislation like this wont really change anything. I don't have the stats, but the majority of gun violence is attributed to pistols, which are by far the most widely used semi automatic weapons in the country. So what is a president to do? ban handguns sales also? Well, we are already an armed nation, so I don't think this is the answer... and people who go to a gun store and have 500- 1000 dollars to spend on a gun aren't a large percentage of the people committing violent acts... by the time you are successful enough to have that kind of disposable income for a hobby, then you probably aren't planning to rob a liquor store. How about mandatory disarmament? If this was a jeopardy answer, the question would be " What is the most likely potential cause for a second civil war? " The problem is that criminals by definition don't care what the law says. Law abiding gun owners do, and removing guns from them doesn't account for the unlawful and stolen guns already in the hands of criminals. Law abiding gun owners own guns to protect the things that they have earned and the people they love from the criminal element. If there was a way to guarantee that a complete disarmament meant there were zero guns in the hands of criminals as well, then most (reasonable) owners would gladly turn them in. But with the amount of firepower that is already out there, this is unrealistic. So where does that leave us besides in a cycle where laws make it easier for guns to fall into the hands of the criminal element as well as the people wishing to defend themselves from said element? I don't know... And I don't think there is a good answer to this problem at all. I don't like the fact that I live in a country so wrought with fear that the people that attain the american dream are so worried about it being ripped away from them that it comes to arming themselves, but I completely understand it...

I have been using a Kindle for a few years and I generally really like it. Sometimes .mobi formats display the pages in percentage instead of page numbers, which is pretty annoying when reading a long book and having to flip 12 "screens" for a percentage to go up. Also I don't find a kindle especially ergonomic for long periods at a time... I bought the leather book-like case and it is very comfortable to hold with the right hand, but not so much for me being left handed and tending to hold a book open with my left. Other than that I have no complaints, I enjoy the screen brightness, contrast, etc. So I probably read 3 or 4 digital for every 1 paper...and having just moved it was pretty cool to only have to move 2 bins of books as opposed to 4 or 5 if my kindle library was physical. This alone will keep me reading a few paper books a year, as I enjoy going to the discount bookstore knowing I refuse to leave until finding something new to read.

Second that... I picked it up on release day also but ended up selling it to amazon a week later with the intention of forcing myself to finish it and have it back in the mail within a couple of days... After investing alot into the series, I wanted to know the story but the gameplay was so tedious I was basically bored and/or frustrated the entire play-through. The horse mechanics alone made me insane... Oh and a few times I got desychronized during cutscences.