Sausage Party.
What a supreme waste.
I made the mistake of watching it with family.
Just to clarify, I wasn’t tricked into thinking it was a children’s movie, I knew full well it was going to be a vulgar Seth Rogen comedy, I just didn’t expect the massive food orgy at the end.
Sausage Party.
What a supreme waste.
I made the mistake of watching it with family.
I predict…
Isn’t it like the last one where you could play as any hero anywhere? I’d prefer that to locale-specific heroes.
I’m also hoping that the different era soldier types aren’t locked to specific locations.
That might be the case. Truth be told, I didn’t play the first one. I’m actually alright with that. I thought you only have a limited selection of heroes based on the map (like the original Battlefront 2; if you were playing Utapau, for example, you could only play as either Grievous or Obi-Wan), and they just decided that Rey and Han Solo fit for Naboo. If you can pick from all the heroes and play whoever you want, then it doesn’t bother me.
How would you guys feel about ranges where you can rent some of the more eccentric guns/attachments, shoot them for a bit, turn them in, and leave? I think this is a decent compromise between the “they’re just fun to shoot” side, and the “nobody should own fully automatic rifles (or whatever else)” side.
So what’s the pro silencer argument anyway? Unless you’re a hitman, or James Bond, I don’t understand the need for one.
That they still sound like this. They’re pretty darn loud. As for the ‘need’ for a suppressor; they make it so you don’t need ear protection to shoot, I guess. It’s not really a necessity, but it’s probably nice to have. That said, I’m not still sure how I feel about suppressors.
I’m excited for the Battlefront 2(017) Beta, I just hope the hero selection isn’t final. I’m irrationally bothered by being able to play as Rey or Han during the attack on Naboo, or use Maul’s TPM ship among TIE Fighters and X-Wings.
I’m very opposed to needlessly limiting freedom, even if it isn’t a very objectively important freedom, like gun collecting. We need to heavily regulate who can own a gun and put in place harsh penalties and strict oversight when it comes to where those guns end up once someone buys them, meaning that all guns (or at least the more dangerous ones) need to be bought and sold through licensed dealers with background checks and the like. Also, illegal and excess guns need to be confiscated and destroyed to decrease the massive number of guns floating around this country. Banning all guns for everyone is a pointless and stupid exercise of authoritarian government. I’m in favor of heavy gun regulations, but I’m also in favor of keeping this country as free as possible, within reason, and the fact is, most gun-owners aren’t endangering anyone.
EDIT: Also, I agree with everything that the preceding post says.
I pretty much agree with this.
There are two things that make me think that less access to guns would be a good thing:
- look at information from other countries, see how they have less guns, and less suicide/homicide
- consider what percentage of suicide and homicide is related to heat of the moment decisions. If you slow down that persons access to a gun by even 10 minutes, how many of those decisions would not be made?
Is that correlational or causational? Is it because of cultural differences? Population differences? Is it just because they have fewer guns? Better access to healthcare or mental healthcare? Better laws regarding domestic violence? Less gang violence? Less racism? Less poverty? More? There’s a lot to consider when comparing two countries that feed into suicide and homicide rates than just “they have fewer guns and therefore fewer deaths.” I also want to point out that I’m not arguing that less guns here wouldn’t equal less deaths because that’d be stupid. If we could completely ban driving and alcohol and drugs, we’d see less deaths there, too (and there’d be a much bigger impact than banning guns as well!).
You definitely would see fewer crimes of passion and spur-of-the-moment suicides, I won’t deny that at all. But when someone really wants to kill another person, or when someone is really sure they don’t want to live anymore… that’s not something that can be stopped by less access to a given implement. That’s the real problem I’m looking at here: how do we keep it from getting to the point where a certain tool is the issue?
you raise excellent points. but isn’t it worth trying out the premise that less guns means less violence?
Honestly, I don’t think so. Some people are so insanely protective of their guns/paranoid of the government that it’d be easier to drain the ocean with a single spoon. Why waste that effort on the impossible task of trying to get rid of [specific types of?] guns, when that effort can instead by used on solutions that are plausible?
ironically, when discussing gun control in the past, I brought my concern about bump stocks. Unfortunately, my concern was justified. I would be curious what Ferris would say.
You were actually the first person I thought of when I saw this video, because I remember you asking me what I thought of bump fire stocks.
The gun community consensus is that a “Gat Crank” was used here (basically a little crank handle you attach to your trigger guard and crank like “ye olde gatlinge gune” in order to actuate the trigger faster than your finger likely could [but not as fast or as smoothly as an actual automatic weapon]), but the basic objective remains the same: simulate automatic fire with a semi-automatic weapon for fun at the range.
It annoyed me because A. I knew this was going to happen, and B. I hate things like that because the gun rights issue is contentious enough without people deliberately going in and stretching the rules and trying to see what they can get away with in a legal grey area, because then we end up in this kind of situation where something has to give and a lot of the time what gives are our rights.
Hopefully we see a nice ATF ban on Gat Cranks and Bump Fire Stocks and that’s the end of it. Good riddance.
Welcome back, btw.
JEDIT: Just looked at the pictures of the guns and it actually looks like a bump fire stock rather than a Gat Crank. Whoops.
I agree both Gat Cranks and bump fire stocks should be banned.
I think that most people would agree. Banning fully automatics but not bump stocks and cranks seems like an oversight, to me.
And welcome back, Warb 😃
I can’t say what the problem is…
You know what, I’ll give it a try.
If we’re referring to mass shootings—I’m gonna have to use the hollow and cliche “mental health.”
If we’re referring to the murder rate as a whole—the drug war.
Obviously the issue is much more complicated than this; and simply naming things and blaming them for murder, without ever going beyond that, is not very productive.
I can’t say what the problem is; but I can say, with confidence, that violent video games aren’t it.
^ Ditto
At the very least, there need to be extremely strict, and strictly enforced gun ownership laws.
Honestly, even if we had the strictest [edit: ownership] laws possible, I think this guy would’ve slipped through the cracks. He had no criminal history, he showed no signs of planning anything like this, and he had no discernible motive (at least right now, these may change as more information is released). He was just an average 60 year old man with time to waste and a hobby.
I wonder what Danfun thinks about this.
I for one wouldn’t subject myself to such atrocious animation.
Wow, that animation is really bad.
FTFM
^Not sure if failed joke or failed attempt to respond to correct post.
Uh, both? 😛
So I checked out The Dark Tower trailer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjwfqXTebIY
Looks like another mediocre adaptation-in-name-only, complete with craptastic CG “action”. I’ll pass.
Wow, that animation is really bad.
With a couple of the most recent posts (not you yhwx), it’s hard to tell if you guys get what is so staggeringly stupid about his Rocket Man tweet or if you’re just providing additional commentary.
Perhaps Un is Rocket Man Jr. 😉
Being nice to Rocket Man hasn’t worked in 25 years, why would it work now? Clinton failed, Bush failed, and Obama failed. I won’t fail.
The ignorance on display is staggering.
War with NK is failure. Clinton, Bush, and Obama were very good at not failing. Trump seems to be trying very hard to fail.
His last post on reddit was 23 days ago, so he’s probably not dead. Maybe he just forgot about the edit or put it on the backburner for a bit.
Y’know, it was originally meant to be a temporary joke avatar, but it’s starting to grow on me.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/21/politics/kfile-roy-moore-homosexuality-illegal/index.html
Holy shit.
To be fair, I’m sure it would cost quite a bit of money to change all the US flags. We’ve got them hanging everywhere, including other countries. That said, I don’t think the flags having to be changed is enough of a reason to deny Puerto Rico statehood.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puerto_Rican_status_referendum,_2017
EDIT: Damn, I got pushed to the next page; now it’s not as clear what I’m replying to :c
Jeebus’ latest avatar fills me with existential dread.
My response:
The anthem thing is just the latest episode in the “dumb controversies” TV series. Something for idiots to get mad about(while the news throws red meat at them), and for football players to protest… what exactly?
If you aren’t protesting with a specific goal in mind (an actual concrete outcome) it’s pretty pointless IMO.
https://www.joincampaignzero.org/solutions/#solutionsoverview
I think these are some sensible goals.