I want teh kotor 3

The next time the KGB kills me for not agreeing with the government, I'll let you know. Are you out of your freaking mind??

I have three really freaking big letters for you. Ready? Good. NSA Right, and the next time the NSA kills me for not agreeing with the government, I'll let you know. EDIT: In regards to the imminent domain thing, LoF, when the government in the Iron Curtain wanted something, they grabbed their AKs and shot you. When the American government wants something, they go through a bureaucracy. It takes a while, usually amounts to nothing, and, perhaps most importantly, doesn't end with corpses.

More Mass Effect. Hell yeah for the grind. Maybe I'll finally get around to replaying Makai Kingdom or one of the Disgaeas because of it.

Welll it would be if that's how you spend it! My point exactly.

So can the government in the United States? There was a study done of (IIRC) 10,014 reported cases of police abuse, where only 10 or so had significant punishment (significant punishment being one week's suspension without pay or worse). If a police officer shot and killed you, it is extraordinarily likely that he or she could get away with it. As to "robbing you at a whim," have you ever heard of a little thing called imminent domain? Edit: Also, even during the Stalinist purges, there were actually trials (by the troikas), even if they were "show trials." That's fundamentally different from "at a whim." I have three really freaking big letters for you. Ready? Good. KGB

I'm not a big giver to non-local stuff outside of Invisible Children, so I can't help much, but wouldn't it be easier and cheaper to do community service-type stuff rather than donations? In any event, those big international things like AI, etc rarely do anything. :lol:

So? The government could also kill or rob you at a whim. I highly doubt he's the smartest person in this thread. Just saying.

I ate dinner and played Mass Effect. Meh. NYE is probably my least favorite holiday.

No. Also, why AC1 but not AC2? It was superior to the original in every aspect.

Hurrrrrr, Communism is evil and dictatorial by definition and obviously cannot exist without brutally suppressing its people. HURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR. And you call LoF the troll? It can't exist without oppression. How in the hell else is its "everybody has the same amount of money" stupidity enforced? I mean, I'm sure as hell not giving up the majority of my money.

Ya know, I think the Chinese Constitution would disagree with you.

This.

Poorly trained paramilitaries are hardly the threat you seem to think they are. Besides, if there's a revolution, it will have an appearance of propriety. Your reaction would seem disproportionate and wild to most. A revolution here is not going to occur tomorrow in some kind of socialist putsch. It will be the product of a generation's work, and of months of hard labor before the actual act. In 1904, it would seem as bizarre and insane to think of a socialist Russia as it is today to think of a socialist America. No sense of humor! Evidently you did not get it, you are the one who said there are no rights that are sacrosanct. Gun owners beleive the right to keep and bear is. So the ones who beleive in rights are the ones that own the guns. It was meant to be a little joke but I guess I did not set it up all that well. Besides, you strike me as a humorless fellow anyway. People who push for "second amendment rights" are usually nutcases. Give me one good reason why it should be an unquestionable right to own a device which exists almost exclusively to kill other people? Even if they were illegal, the true psychos would have them anyway. Since I don't want to be defenseless if someone breaks into my house with a gun, I should have one too.

Just ordered my tickets for PAX East. Anybody else going?

Umm... New Year's is tomorrow... I can't imagine you're that far ahead... new year's day is tomorrow new year's eve on the other hand is today I didn't think America was so far behind... Never mind then...

You forgot Jack Thompson. Man needs to be institutionalized.

Umm... New Year's is tomorrow... I can't imagine you're that far ahead...

I have a cousin who works for the WWE (video editing and such), and according to family members and friends who have gotten tickets through her, the live show is actually quite entertaining. You have a beer or two, shout some insults at the performers, chuckle to yourself at the crowdmembers who take it too seriously, and watch the spectacle. I think I can understand the appeal in that way-- bottom line, those guys are showmen who know how to entertain a crowd. Granted, the people I've talked to both had good seats and got the tickets for free, so that probably colors their observations a bit. And this doesn't extend to the mysterious appeal of the televised product. Yeah. I've been to a couple of live wrestling matches. They were great fun. Some screaming, some yelling, some taunting, and lots of crazy drunks. The TV shows, however, are a different story.

Poorly trained paramilitaries are hardly the threat you seem to think they are. Besides, if there's a revolution, it will have an appearance of propriety. Your reaction would seem disproportionate and wild to most. A revolution here is not going to occur tomorrow in some kind of socialist putsch. It will be the product of a generation's work, and of months of hard labor before the actual act. In 1904, it would seem as bizarre and insane to think of a socialist Russia as it is today to think of a socialist America. Ya know, there are a whole crapton of dead Union soldiers would disagree with you.

This.

Human life is valuable in and of itself, and the government should try to ensure that you live a long life, but that does not mean you have a "right" to live. If the government chooses to recognize such a right, it is because rights-based ethics are a good way to build a cohesive legal system, and human life is valuable, not because you actually have some fundamental right to live. After all, your life can easily be taken away without your consent, even without government or institutional intrusion. You don't even need another person to help. So if we don't have rights, why does the government?

I merely believe that rights are a collective fiction, created to serve a more perfect social order. As such, no right can be called "fundamental" or "inalienable." Rights are not universal, they are not inborn or created by natural phenomena. They are useful tools to create cohesive legal systems, and have little to nothing to do with actual morality. So I have no right to live, and anyone should be able to run into my house and shoot me? EDIT: wow, that came our wrong. Not a death threat. Fixed to make that more evident.

This. Communism is the enemy.

So it's an acceptable self-dellusion? Well unless you're one of the initiated, and then well you know, because you've had it proven to you... It's all against reason. There will only be proof of God's existence until some theoretical physicist figures out where the Big Bang came from. Until then, the proof is that the universe exists.

LoF, I noticed a great discrepancy in your arguments: Economically, you think everybody should be helping everyone. In this, you seem to care about people. But you hate rights, and so do not care about people. So which is it? Are we all evil creatures who deserve to be punished for existence, or should we all be helped and uplifted?