alanschu

Boom, boom, kaboom. I love it. I particularly enjoyed running down your last surviving gun crew member! Unfortunately, you also seem to enjoy taking out the tanks that I can't stand to lose! I'd much rather lose the crappy 38t tanks over those Panzer IIIH's!

I'm well aware of the way the Live Team works. I'm sure you're not the only one.

Yeah...tho the only thing I remember from it is Paul Reubens. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> His death scene was very dramatic!

I guess I should have the word "it" as my link. Too small EDIT: N/M, yours is a compilation. Go Fernando!

At least I'm trying to mount an offensive this time!

If it doesn't go off then what purpose does it serve? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That would be the threat of Mutually Assured Destruction used as an insurance policy to prevent "normal" people from killing themselves, even if it means not killing others. Let's try and keep the conversation sensible, or I'll be forced to change the topic. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I don't think that's possible. He practically just admitted to doing it for stirring the pot.

Fair enough.

Joke's on us guys. I can't believe we took the bait.

Wouldn't be the first time. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Considering you're still alive, I'm pretty sure it would be. EDIT: Whatever. You're clearly just trolling the waters now. Joke's on us.

A death is a death, accidental or no they are both just as sweet. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm sure you'd feel the same way when you try using a gun on a guy that is trying to kill you, only to have it misfire and have you kill yourself.

I rather rely on chance than the human animal. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Except in both cases the human animal still exists. So you'd rather live on top of a bomb that could go off, rather than one that won't go off?

I'd rather use the ones that didn't spontaneously blow up when I fired them though!

Too bad there's no way to safely do it, by minimizing accidental deaths.

Would you feel just as safe if the nukes you live on top of could go off randomly for no particular reason?

Yes, it does. So despite the fact that things like safeties for guns have resulted in less accidental deaths with firearms, they're as unsafe as a gun without a safety?

Have you seen the movie Wargames? " <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes I have. Matthew Broderick, Thermonuclear War. Yadda Yadda. Thank god for Tic-Tac-Toe/ As for "a kill being a kill," I suppose you'd have a point. If the intent of firearms was to kill the person using it, or the intent of nuclear warheads to kill the person storing it.

I think so too.

Brakes were an analogy to the current topic. Hence, still related to the topic. Talking about teenagers when asked that question is a deflection. Unless you're trying to say that nukes are unsafe because of teenagers talking on the phone.

Strawman. Not what we're discussing. Do brakes make a car safer?

I'm guessing brakes don't make cars safer either.

Yes. Because if one drops a gun and it goes off and kills someone, it's clearly just as safe.

They're both loaded. Why you seriously thought I'd be changing two variables is beyond me.

So a gun without a safety (appropriately named) isn't any safer than a gun without one??

I guess Fernando hadn't scored his yet :D For those that like to look at again. "Time to kill....now" indeed!

The thing about DLA is that, when they were hired, they still helped work on a story with an actual adventure. (Their response to the cutting of support by Atari also demonstrates the woes of hiring "mod groups" to work with you). Yes, people have made changes to the NWN game environment. But how much of their stuff had a price attached to it?