Errantry

this is my point... communism starts out with a tyrannical government that says "once all is well, you won't need us any more!" but in reality, any fully socialist economic system will continually require a tyranny to keep it going. that's the "lie" that i was talking about. taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Taks - The term 'communism' is often incorrectly used, as it is popular belief that a communist society has a dictator. This is not so; a truly communist society has no leader, and no laws other than 'a man makes what he can, and shares with those who need what he makes'. Communism cannot start off with a government, because by definition one cannot exist. The problem with communism is that it is an ideal, rather than a working system.

I don't know . . . she would probably laugh her head off, thus endearing you to her through sheer amusement.

^ Very healthy. Very stress relieving. Esp. the last one - and the first, to be fair.

Great point you have there, indeed. Well, yes. If from the murder total you substract those that didn't involve previous planning, the rest are mostly, planned crimes. Uncanny logic you got there, buddy. Read the newspapers, watch the news. All the stats you should need are there. It's not everyday a DC sniper pops up, fortunately. Interestingly enough, those were different times and for starters, you couldn't buy an assault rifle at the grocery. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, I didn't count out absolutely, off-the-wall spontaneous murders, now did I? " Then again, I felt it was a pretty safe bet. Most people don't just say,"Gosh, that guy's annoying me. Hey, I should kill him!" At least, I don't think ordinary people do that . . . On a different note, I'll bet the public executions had an effect on the public. Would-be murderers were at home puking their guts out. The electric chair was not a pretty sight.

Another self-righteous post alright. Making such an absolute claim requires that either you are an authority in the matter, or that you provide some proof. You meet none of the requirements, so your point is moot. But that's not the only fact you got wrong in your post. Do some research, and you will see that most crimes are committed without previous planification. Usually people go berserk for some reason and someone dies. People lose control and their emotions override their rational safeguards and moral concerns. Planned, cold blood murders are in fact a minority, if only because most sane people can't do that unless they have killed before. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> In reference to your first comment about being self-righteous . . . well, yes, I am. I believe that it is quite common in this world, and fairly accepted. And if you would read into my post a bit more, you would see my last comment: "Unless you're talking about bar fights, but that's another story." It was deliberate. I was discluding reactionary murders and those brought about by intoxication or drug usage of some sort. And could -you- please tell me where you got your information? It was difficult at best to look up statistics on premeditated murder vs. non, as I had no results. Thanks - -Marty

It has nothing to do with intelligence. Read above. Have you watched 'A clockwork orange'? In case you haven't I'll tell you that in that movie some psycho is conditioned to have involuntary responses to certain stimuli. Namely, he was nauseated by the sole thought of violence, even verbal violence. Still, the guy rationally loved violence and hated himself for becoming such a wuss. Granted, the movie is just fiction, but it serves to illustrate my point on how reason, intelligence or willpower aren't enough to overcome the tricks your mind plays on you. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, while I have not watched 'A Clockwork Orange', I have read the book. As I recall, many of the characters were rather nutty in some way. And, if the movie is similar to the book, it was set in a futuristic time and place. As you said yourself, the book is fiction, and the man was 'psycho'. A game in itself cannot 'condition' you. There are many people to whom common sense is more important than emotion. You do not kill someone through instinct gained through a video game; people may gain violent or indifferent tendencies, but the majority of murders are planned out beforehand. Unless you're talking about bar fights, but that's another story.

I think we all need to express our agression from time to time. I know I do. Better to do that in a game than in real life... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> But aren't presidential elections in America designed so we can express our aggression?

To B5C: Out of curiosity, do you ever learn the 'bigger story'?

To Llyranor: You should. Girls would buy it, especially if you continued mentioning the 'naked guy'. Your review was beautiful, just beautiful, heartfelt and true. [insert proper proud sniffling noises that parents do at their son's graduation].

Are you getting a third for your wedding?

Yes, I have played it. What you say is true, and I believe GTA:SA is a good game - however, my tastes vary. I, personally, do not like it. We are judging on opinion. Some of the ideas incorporated into GTA:SA were not to my liking. You illustrate the freedoms given to the PC, which I never really wanted to begin with. I feel like you aren't a specific character, but just some random guy off the street. Of course, I never really got into it as much as a game like Baldur's Gate II, which visually reminded me of Diablo. There were only little things that made me feel as if Diablo, though I despise it, was more of an RPG.

It pains me to reply...Diablo. At least there's more of a character and plot there.

Sometimes you wonder: exactly -what- are these people smoking?

^ (thepixiesrock) It's nice to have someone to blame after the fact, but as you said, it's pointless. (Reason I don't support the death penalty). You can't change what they did before - that's what they're blamed for, though. What you can do is try to make sure it never happens again.

Fallout 1 and 2. You don't know what you're missing.

I believe the parents and the children/children's friends are equally responsible for actions committed. Parents have a responsibility towards their children; if there is an age suggestion on a video game, parents should look at it and not buy a game rated 'Mature' for a child of 12. If they feel a game is harmful to their child's psych, then they shouldn't pay for it. It's foolish when parents blame games for their children's problems. No one instance (or, in this case, game) influences a person's entire life. Of course, I also feel that the majority of the violence in games is unneeded. Chopping someone's limbs off is not realistic in any sense, expecially when it would be just as effective to have their hitpoints lower until death. That might help people with the shock factor (Oh, people -bleed- when you cut them. This isn't like my game.) and draw connections: games aren't like real life. You aren't really a gang member wielding a bazooka, or knives, or somesuch. Chances are, you're a kid supported by your parents, or in college, or you have a full-time job you go to every day. Children and gamers in general should also be intelligent enough to discern the boundaries between reality and fantasy. Face it: you can't beat someone up without hurting them. There are consequences to your actions in real life that there aren't in games, but sometimes, this escapes people. Young children exposed to violent games are more likely to think that they are unique, are given some hidden power that allows them to judge others. They continue to think that others aren't as good as them, because 'in the game', they get slaughtered by the PC. No one person is completely to blame for the increase of violence - not the creators of a game, parents who buy it, or children that play it. But something needs to change, and video game restrictions are the easiest to apply to the problem. Maybe then parents would begin to take responsibility for their children's actions, and gamers would not be as inclinded to commit said actions.

I would like to see my video card crash and burn on Dragon Age . . . Yep, I voted for it.

What I'm waiting/desperately hoping for: KotOR 2 - for PC Jade Empire (If it comes out in PC) Suikoden IV Neverwinter Nights 2 The next Sims. There aren't any shortages of those, though.

Well, going for comedy is "Spaceballs", and "Airplane". Except those weren't 2004 movies. Do the "Star Wars" DVDs count as 2004 movies? They added over an hour of content, from what I heard. And, being a geek, Empire Strikes Back -is- my favorite movie.

This is embarassing, but I really only like a couple of groups: Pink Floyd* Green Day Fastball Queen Everclear* Enya* Hoobastank Smile Empty Soul* * Girlfriend influence

Really? With all the extra fur you'd think it'd be more expensive. Or, [gasp], was it -fake fur-?

A. All of the above B. 1-2 of the above (C.) None of the above Unless it's Halloween. Except I gave away my gorilla suit. Sometimes I wonder . . .

Errr....I've never read it. The bookstore didn't have it, and I was too lazy to order it online. I've heard it's a great read, though.

^ Do you wear these suits often?

Coke. Pepsi, somehow, tastes cheap. Like plain sugar.