-
Content count
8780 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Everything posted by ThunderPeel2001
-
Eh? We were talking about gun control, not just assault rifles. (You said, "I just think that blaming and banishing a tool is a step in the wrong direction.") Now you're trying to make out that you were just talking about assault rifles, which means, by your argument, that the public should be allowed to own landmines, miniguns, explosives, AFVs... because keeping them banned is like banning school buses and Corvettes...? I'm not convinced. (All of the above would be extremely helpful in preventing a home invasion, after all.)
-
Thanks. It's more the actual tax laws and exemptions I'd like to learn about.
-
Obligatory Comical YouTube Thread II: The Fall of YouTube
ThunderPeel2001 replied to pabosher's topic in Idle Banter
For reason I feel like posting some Mr Show... -
The truth revealed...
-
I do understand that. I have a lot of American friends, so I do appreciate the "other side", as it were. It's just the most insane argument in the universe to imagine that America, a country where people get slightly teary at the word "freedom", could ever let itself lapse into a fascistic state. Not to mention that, if that truly was the reason for the populace to arm itself, then why aren't people gathered in some sort of military force in preparation. Why aren't they allowed to own grenade launchers, bazookers, Apache helicopters and nuclear bombs? A friend of mine who studied US history told me once that the only reason that clause was included in the Second Amendment was because they were fearful of an invasion -- at that particular moment in time. Arming the populace, as part of a well-regulated militia, was a way of increasing defence. (Any history buffs know if she was right?) Finally, the scariest thing is just how much fear that mindset exhibits. The problem is, as was pointed out by my friend's FB status on page one, is that it's impossible to assess someone as fit for ownership of a weapon. Even if that person is of perfectly sound body and mind when any test was given, it doesn't mean that when his wife leaves him for his brother on the same week he gets fired from his job that he won't go mental. Is there a better a solution than gun control to ensure the above doesn't happen? Yes, I can see this. In the UK, only a tiny minority of the police carry guns... because they don't need them, because the populace isn't generally armed. That seems fair to me. (I take it nobody listened to the Bill Hicks video I posted?) I don't care about the Army, though -- to fight an army we'd need the same weapons. I'm betting that the number of guns per capita wasn't the highest in the world in the 50s :-/ This makes no sense. It's not about appointing blame, it's about prevention. Nobody is blaming guns, they're blaming gun laws. If it was legal to drink and drive, and you ended up killing someone while doing it, somebody might think that making drink driving illegal was a step in the right direction.
-
Well I did place the words "I think" in front of the sentence, so I thought it was obviously just my opinion. That said, I'm glad I now know it IS possible to play the game as released -- even if I personally found it too difficult. (I'd still love some tips, because I REALLY sucked at playing it.)
-
Yeah, I thought that for a moment (when he burst into the house), although I don't recall feeling that when I first saw it a few years back. Probably all this talk of massacres at the moment making us sensitive?
-
So you don't think he really supports gun control...? Even if that's the case, I'm not sure what your point is here. Again, I don't know what you're saying or why you're saying it...? The proposed ban is for "military style assault weapons" and "high capacity magazines", not just AR-15s. With this in mind, I don't know who or what you're addressing. Again...? These are two separate things, and I don't think anyone is arguing that children shouldn't get more psychological support. Obama is also pushing for increased access to mental health services, too. I don't see how this changes anything. This latest gunman was 20 years old. An adult. He just happened to be living at home. What if he didn't? Back to the "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument? It's obviously true, but guns sure make it a lot easier! A - Maybe we can remove it from future equations? B - Surely less guns will reduce the amount of gun violence? C - Who would you suggest blaming instead?
-
More from 1988... 26 years ago(!). Your Sinclair got a lot of backlash from their readers for featuring this page three girl on their cover (and including a "pin-up", to boot): A few issues later, the debate was still going on. This reader tries to rationalize her appearance in a leopard skin bikini...
-
Sexism in games discussion... 1988 style: We've not changed all that much, have we?
-
You know, for kids...
-
Thanks, Miffy! Yeah, I stayed last night playing it until 4. It's got its hooks into me The weird thing is that I'm only half-following the story. I mean I know what's going on in a general sense, but I'm not really following all the characters too closely -- but it's not affecting my enjoyment one iota. A few more things they did right that GTAIV dropped the ball on: When you get your apartment upgraded, it's seriously upgraded. It looks beautiful. In GTAIV, I couldn't tell the difference between the mid-tier and the high-tier apartments. Also, your clothes are actually pretty cool. In GTAIV your options were "bad or worse". For fun, I'm currently running around in a white suit covered in blood, that gets even more covered in blood when I get into fights. I don't know why, but it tickles me that nobody comments on it. There's just a lot of nice touches like that which bugged me a little in GTA.
-
Hmm. Just watched the trailer: I'm not sure what you're call that. It looks almost SteamPunky. I guess it shares some things with CyberPunk (dystopian/evil empire/technology), but I don't think anyone would use it as an example of the genre.
-
-
I still have all my old issues of Amiga Power And possibly some Your Sinclair around somewhere, too. Those were the days... Edit: Oh shit! That link is awesome! I'm currently downloading Your Spectrum, Your Sinclair and Crash! Woot! (No Amiga Power, though. It'd be nice to have them on my iPad.)
-
That's a cool logo if you ask me. Reminds me of Shag's work.
-
It appears that you're arguing that the requirement for some people to have weapons is more important than a few kids' lives every now and then? (Like my friend's Facebook status pointed out.) Or are you trying to say that it's too late? There's already too many guns around that legislation won't make a difference? (In which case, why are you against it?) Moving away from my own idealism, I do wonder what will happen if there's another shooting. Will people see the ban on assault weapons as a failure that didn't make any difference, so why bother? Or will they think that the law didn't go far enough? This video addresses the media's part in tragedies like this, and is often posted during discussions like this, because it's excellent:
-
CyberPunk books also share the idea that technology has become more important than humanity -- not in the sense that computers now control world and we are all their slaves (although The Matrix certainly went that route), but in the sense that "life is cheap, but technology is valuable". So "low life and high tech" really does sum it up well, IMO. That said, it is tricky to nail an exact definition. I just know there's a certain dystopian element -- In Neuromancer, Case is threatened with ending up as "spare parts" in some backstreet clinic. In Ghost in the Shell, someone has become so cybernetically enhanced they've lost sight of that it means to be human, in Johnny Mnemonic it's revealed that pharma companies have found a cure for the futuristic plague, but they're suppressing it because they make more money from treatment. It's not played for laughs (although I guess Snow Crash was a little silly). So, Tanu, it's not enough for something to be set in a future with cybernetics and virtual reality and hacking. You can a sense of the tone just from the opening line from Neuromancer, arguably the prototypical CyberPunk novel: The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel.
-
-
Nope. The 21st chapter is a little controversial. It's apparently a (serious) happy ending, and it was cut by the US publishers until 1986 -- when Burgess asked for it to be reinstated -- because it was felt to be unbelievable. According to Wikipedia, in Kubrick's opinion, the final chapter was unconvincing and inconsistent with the book -- which is why the film omits it. Probably makes more sense if Alex IS lying, but I'm guessing Burgess didn't see it that way.
-
This is tangentially related and also amusing:
-
Nice!
-
I agree, to a point, but I don't see how you can deny that the film enjoys showing us the naked female form. During the opening mission, doesn't she just get naked for no obvious reason?
-
I totally agree, but as it's just speculation that all mad gunmen had bad childhoods, it's hard to say if it will help :-/
-
Ah, I see. My bad. Maybe jeremywc will return and fully explain his point of view