Wrong, you absolutely have every right to commit suicide, and any law that prohibits this would be patently unconstitutional. Now IANAL, but it seem to me the problem of course would be in getting standing to fight this out in a court of law...
Scene One:
(A brightly lite coffee shop with a man and a woman talking in a booth off to the side)
Woman: "So tell me about your most embarrassing moment."
Man: "Well...ok!"
Man: "So there is was the weekend after high school graduation. Me and a couple buddies went to a beach party to celebrate.
We had a couple beers and then some one decided we should all go skinny dipping. I went along with the idea and ran in to the water and was waiting for everyone else. When all of the sudden the cops showed up! Everyone else ran but I was stuck in the lake with my cloths on the shore. I decided to wait in the water and hope they didn't notice, no such luck. They must have heard me splashing around because suddenly the cop's flashlight was on me and they were ordering me out of the water. Well long story short I got hauled into the police station holding my cloths and wearing a towel. The judge laughed at me and had me do 10hrs community service."
Woman: (Laughing her head off)
Woman: I can't believe your friends would ditch you like that!...
Scene 2:
(Same woman standing alone in a nice apartment, looking through some papers)
Woman: "What!"
Woman: "Arrested for Under age drinking, Public intoxication and Indecent exposure? Like I would ever date some one like that."
Or, here's a crazy idea, they get life insurance themselves. Honestly, why should society be responsible for holding their hand when every other reasonable adult knows to get life insurance even if their employer does not offer it? They could probably even work with whatever trade group they are a part of to get it as a benefit, if it is not already offered. Why make an exception for singers and songwriters when every other profession already has a working plan in place?
Re:Foie Gras is some nasty shit...
on
Chefs As Chemists
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Do we really need to torture animals before killing & eating them?
Well, if they would just confess and tell us where Bin Laden is...
1) there is a (strong) correlation between violent video games and violence in real life
Hmm, now I am not a statistician but I found your assertion intriguing so I did a few searches. According to most statistical definition a strong correlation is defined as a relation ship between two random variables X and Y with a correlation coefficient having an absolute value above 0.8 and less than 1. I don't suppose your "studies" show this kind of a positive correlation over a large enough sample size, do they? If so i would love to see it.
Not understanding what you were talking about, I decided to look it up.
From the reviews it seems the game was uninspired, lackluster, dull, plagued by poor graphics and a simplistic plot, and these were the favorable reviews. In fact the only reason it was so successful was because of the universal condemnation it received from every single rights group out there.
Judging by the cover image the only good thing I can say about it was that they explicitly labeled it NOT to be sold to minors and that it was for adults only. The makers knew what their target market was and it was for sure not little Johnny Pitfall with some money in his hand. As a matter of fact, I would bet this game was sold at the local spank store and not K-mart or walmart or any where a kid could get a hold of it.
That's more than I can say for Shaq-fu, that unholy game should have been banned for unmitigated suckage. Did you know there is a site dedicated to getting rid of that game?
Well I found a few interviews and articles he did after recent national tragedies, but they do tend to be lost amongst the chatter against Thompson so it is not surprising you missed them. The best bet is to search for "Jack Thompson" + $TRAGEDY, as he seems to be able to find his way to the spotlight after every incident of national suffering to spew his latest theory regarding the cause. Anyway, here's the links for you enjoyment: VA Tech tragedy Devin Moore Shootings Red Lake Shootings
Oh and here is an article by a non gaming web site about the Louisiana Game Bill: HB 1381
Fascist USA ?... you don't know the half! Fechin' bif'teks gave up their culture and ALL their powers of self_protection. Simpering after OxBridge faggotry and a smarmy guilt-ridden angst. That's why we threw you out, limeys. Two_hundred years is a long time to take-the-clue. And if you're not careful, when the muzzis come marching north , or the Slavs west -- and come marching again they will -- we'll let them EAT you. nss *****
...I like big sausage? Freaking hell it's another Jimmy Dean ad. I swear they are getting more and more annoying every time.
How is the parent post Flamebait? The post was not insulting or bating in any way and expressed a valid point. According to the CDC, Drowning is the second leading cause of death for children ages 1-14, with Motor vehicle accidents as the first. Unintentional firearms do not make the top ten list till the 10-14 age group, and even then are only at 9, behind suffocation.
Further more, the parent post does make a good suggestion, having the NRA teach gun safety would be a great step to reducing accidental and purposeful firearms injuries and deaths. Too many kids nowadays see guns as either something to be feared or else "toys" for adults. They should be taught that guns are nothing to fear but that they are definitely not toys. They are a tools and like all tools, improper care when handling them can cause people to get hurt or even killed. Of course there are a few adults who could learn that lesson as well.
If you daughter were kidnapped, would you protest them using her cell phone to track her?
I know it's cool to be against the 5-0, but I feel you opinion may change once you need the police to protect you or give you justice when a crime has been committed against you.
Interesting appeal to emotion, in the situation where the police would like to use the cell phone of the victim to track the victim it should be relatively easy to either obtain permission or a warrant to track the victims cell phone. This would be a minimal delay and would ultimately lead to the victims safe recovery and the conviction and imprisonment of the criminal.
However if the police chose to not follow the law and instead went about tracking the victim without either a warrant or permission, they would introduce a large target for the defendant's attorney to attack and gain the criminals acquittal, thereby releasing this criminal to commit his or her crimes again. True it may have saved your daughter but what about your neighbor's, or the kid down the block, or maybe the criminal will try again for your daughter, after all they have the time.
It's not so much that it is "cool" to be against the police, it more of a fact that people would like it if the people that we trust to enforce the law would also follow it themselves, in the end it's best for everyone.
And what are the Chinese gonna do at the moon? Well, if they were using these new suits I would suggest maybe a round of lunar beach volleyball. Maybe they could team up with Sweden and borrow their Bikini Team.
Dude, if you can pop wood at -270 C, you deserve to show off that bone, for you would have conquered the ultimate attack of shrinkage. You would be a hero to showers and growers everywhere, and achieve instant membership in the Dick Hall of Fame®. So wear you're woody with pride, for legends will be written about you: Super Boner.
Nah Man, everyone knows the use Elmo to measure drug potency:
Elmo = you start sounding like him.
Elmos = you start hearing him.
Elmos = you start seeing him.
and so on till you hit 10 Elmos, where you think you're trucking along on Sesame Street talking to Big Bird and coloring on the walls, when in reality your running down the street naked and being chased by the cops and flinging your own poo everywhere.
If you aren't doing illegal activities over the phone / airwaves / Internet then why worry ? Because I enjoy my privacy that's why. I don't feel like I should be expected to allow anyone to listen to my private conversations. I want to be able to talk about my latest chicken recipe, job troubles, relationship problems or even why I don't like the government without having some eavesdropper recording my every word. If the government is so interested in what I say that they feel the need to record it then they can follow the legal guideline and go get a freakin warrant.
As far as I am concerned the NSA/CIA/FBI/??? can wiretap and monitor me to their hearts content I promise it will not only be useless but incredibly boring. I don't know why you feel that the only way to show your patriotism is to give up the freedoms that better men have died to protect, regardless I will not follow suite.
Looks as if balls are not the necessary equipment. Sure they are. And Ms. Lindor has the RIAA's in the palm of her hand. Now she's just waiting for the judge to give her the go ahead to rip 'em right off.
Doesn't matter what one thinks... Laws are written... So fortunately(unfortunately) depending on how he is doing this, it may come back to haunt him financially.
Now I am not a lawyer, but as far as I know there is no law written that states an artist must release his or her works through a specific distribution channel, despite the music industry's wishes. So the only thing left must be a contract dispute. If there was an actual breach of contract, I would bet that the Music industry would be marching down to the court house to get an injunction against the newspaper as well as Prince to stop the distribution of this CD. But as they have not done that as of yet I think they are without recourse in this case. Hence their little tirade against Prince in the article in question, to try and sway the court of public appeal. But with such gems as "The Artist Formerly Known as Prince should know that with behavior like this he will soon be the Artist Formerly Available in Record Stores." I am not sure how much sympathy they are going to get.
I'm betting that if it does get bad enough for an uprising, a good portion of the ones doing the uprising will be former military or police. It's not like they live in a vacuum , oblivious to what is happening.
If you actually stop and ask someone what is in Coke [or Pepsi, or whatever] and ask them if they would otherwise normally think to consume that, they probably would say no. It's marketting + the buzz that the sugar/caffeine gives that makes it consumable.
I have three words to say in response to that statement: Rocky Mountain Oysters. There isn't much marketing, and no buzz, unless you count the clippers. But people eat them none the less.
but I'm willing to bet that 95% of current 25-year-olds are guilty of breaking copyrigth-law atleast once in the last year. I would bet that it is more like 99% if not higher, at least if they had ever attended an outdoor birthday party or grade school. The song "Happy birthday" is purported to still be under copyright and public performances without paying royalties to the ASCAP are a violation of the claimed copyright (ASCAP Title code 380008955). Kinda nice to know that every time a kid sings "Happy birthday" in class, they are committing a crime. Although to be fair, the "smell like a monkey" fair use defense has not been tried in court.
I've been wondering how the RIAA's actions up to this point were any different from Mafia tactics. Simple, the USPS wont let the RIAA send a horse head in conjunction with a subpoena.
That's nice.
My uncle has two large cocks, and 10 brooding hens. But yet he never feel the need to brag it up online, maybe your feeling a little inadequate?
Slashdot Mirror
It could sense a can of tuna being opened from five miles away.
Sedating and moving an animal?
Tagging a whale for the study of it's migratory patterns?
Skeet/target shooting?
A gun is a tool, nothing more. The deciding factor as to weather an act is violent or not always rests in the person, not the tool they use.
Hell ya it is! Almost as good as sex...or so I've heard.
Wrong, you absolutely have every right to commit suicide, and any law that prohibits this would be patently unconstitutional. Now IANAL, but it seem to me the problem of course would be in getting standing to fight this out in a court of law...
Scene One:
(A brightly lite coffee shop with a man and a woman talking in a booth off to the side)
Woman: "So tell me about your most embarrassing moment."
Man: "Well...ok!"
Man: "So there is was the weekend after high school graduation. Me and a couple buddies went to a beach party to celebrate. We had a couple beers and then some one decided we should all go skinny dipping. I went along with the idea and ran in to the water and was waiting for everyone else. When all of the sudden the cops showed up! Everyone else ran but I was stuck in the lake with my cloths on the shore. I decided to wait in the water and hope they didn't notice, no such luck. They must have heard me splashing around because suddenly the cop's flashlight was on me and they were ordering me out of the water. Well long story short I got hauled into the police station holding my cloths and wearing a towel. The judge laughed at me and had me do 10hrs community service."
Woman: (Laughing her head off)
Woman: I can't believe your friends would ditch you like that!...
Scene 2:
(Same woman standing alone in a nice apartment, looking through some papers)
Woman: "What!"
Woman: "Arrested for Under age drinking, Public intoxication and Indecent exposure? Like I would ever date some one like that."
Or, here's a crazy idea, they get life insurance themselves. Honestly, why should society be responsible for holding their hand when every other reasonable adult knows to get life insurance even if their employer does not offer it? They could probably even work with whatever trade group they are a part of to get it as a benefit, if it is not already offered. Why make an exception for singers and songwriters when every other profession already has a working plan in place?
Hmm, now I am not a statistician but I found your assertion intriguing so I did a few searches. According to most statistical definition a strong correlation is defined as a relation ship between two random variables X and Y with a correlation coefficient having an absolute value above 0.8 and less than 1. I don't suppose your "studies" show this kind of a positive correlation over a large enough sample size, do they? If so i would love to see it.
From the reviews it seems the game was uninspired, lackluster, dull, plagued by poor graphics and a simplistic plot, and these were the favorable reviews. In fact the only reason it was so successful was because of the universal condemnation it received from every single rights group out there.
Judging by the cover image the only good thing I can say about it was that they explicitly labeled it NOT to be sold to minors and that it was for adults only. The makers knew what their target market was and it was for sure not little Johnny Pitfall with some money in his hand. As a matter of fact, I would bet this game was sold at the local spank store and not K-mart or walmart or any where a kid could get a hold of it.
That's more than I can say for Shaq-fu, that unholy game should have been banned for unmitigated suckage. Did you know there is a site dedicated to getting rid of that game?As a U.S. citizen, let me just say I'm right there with ya.
Well I found a few interviews and articles he did after recent national tragedies, but they do tend to be lost amongst the chatter against Thompson so it is not surprising you missed them. The best bet is to search for "Jack Thompson" + $TRAGEDY, as he seems to be able to find his way to the spotlight after every incident of national suffering to spew his latest theory regarding the cause. Anyway, here's the links for you enjoyment:
VA Tech tragedy
Devin Moore Shootings
Red Lake Shootings
Oh and here is an article by a non gaming web site about the Louisiana Game Bill:
HB 1381
How is the parent post Flamebait? The post was not insulting or bating in any way and expressed a valid point. According to the CDC, Drowning is the second leading cause of death for children ages 1-14, with Motor vehicle accidents as the first. Unintentional firearms do not make the top ten list till the 10-14 age group, and even then are only at 9, behind suffocation.
Further more, the parent post does make a good suggestion, having the NRA teach gun safety would be a great step to reducing accidental and purposeful firearms injuries and deaths. Too many kids nowadays see guns as either something to be feared or else "toys" for adults. They should be taught that guns are nothing to fear but that they are definitely not toys. They are a tools and like all tools, improper care when handling them can cause people to get hurt or even killed. Of course there are a few adults who could learn that lesson as well.
I know it's cool to be against the 5-0, but I feel you opinion may change once you need the police to protect you or give you justice when a crime has been committed against you.
Interesting appeal to emotion, in the situation where the police would like to use the cell phone of the victim to track the victim it should be relatively easy to either obtain permission or a warrant to track the victims cell phone. This would be a minimal delay and would ultimately lead to the victims safe recovery and the conviction and imprisonment of the criminal.
However if the police chose to not follow the law and instead went about tracking the victim without either a warrant or permission, they would introduce a large target for the defendant's attorney to attack and gain the criminals acquittal, thereby releasing this criminal to commit his or her crimes again. True it may have saved your daughter but what about your neighbor's, or the kid down the block, or maybe the criminal will try again for your daughter, after all they have the time.
It's not so much that it is "cool" to be against the police, it more of a fact that people would like it if the people that we trust to enforce the law would also follow it themselves, in the end it's best for everyone.
Dude, if you can pop wood at -270 C, you deserve to show off that bone, for you would have conquered the ultimate attack of shrinkage. You would be a hero to showers and growers everywhere, and achieve instant membership in the Dick Hall of Fame®. So wear you're woody with pride, for legends will be written about you: Super Boner.
- Elmo = you start sounding like him.
- Elmos = you start hearing him.
- Elmos = you start seeing him.
and so on till you hit 10 Elmos, where you think you're trucking along on Sesame Street talking to Big Bird and coloring on the walls, when in reality your running down the street naked and being chased by the cops and flinging your own poo everywhere.Now I am not a lawyer, but as far as I know there is no law written that states an artist must release his or her works through a specific distribution channel, despite the music industry's wishes. So the only thing left must be a contract dispute. If there was an actual breach of contract, I would bet that the Music industry would be marching down to the court house to get an injunction against the newspaper as well as Prince to stop the distribution of this CD. But as they have not done that as of yet I think they are without recourse in this case. Hence their little tirade against Prince in the article in question, to try and sway the court of public appeal. But with such gems as "The Artist Formerly Known as Prince should know that with behavior like this he will soon be the Artist Formerly Available in Record Stores." I am not sure how much sympathy they are going to get.
I'm betting that if it does get bad enough for an uprising, a good portion of the ones doing the uprising will be former military or police. It's not like they live in a vacuum , oblivious to what is happening.
That's nice.
My uncle has two large cocks, and 10 brooding hens. But yet he never feel the need to brag it up online, maybe your feeling a little inadequate?