Longknife

I think you've mostly succeeded in highlighting the differences regarding both self defence and court process between a classic german (and by absorption from Germany, Nordic) legal system and the U.S. one. Well look, I'm not like, trying to sit here and say "stupid americans, their legal system sucks"; hell I'm a dual citizen and half-american. But it just kind of boggles my mind, because even though they're obviously different legal systems, the goals are basically the same and it's more likely the systems would be similar rather than radically different (maybe different in practice but not in results), and yet I sit here wondering why the HELL that court even allowed that crap about labeling Trayvond as a racist on through. But all that aside, like even the case itself, it's truly baffling to see ANYONE hailing Zimmerman as a hero for his actions. It just kind of amazes me how we can go from "let's be reasonable here and try to understand Zimmerman's side" to "good riddance, Trayvond had it coming. How dare he buy skittles?!"

Has anyone had the honor of being able to play this wonderous trainwreck? I'd buy it myself, but I have this personal code about not paying for ****ty products.

Because how else am I supposed to know patrolling the Mojave almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter?

Lol no.

As someone who's studied (German) Law, this case is baffling to me for a couple reasons. The first is that in German law and I'd ASSUME American law as well, you're not allowed to claim "self-defense" if you yourself incited or provoked the confrontation. You can't pick a fight or provoke one and then yell "self-defense" just because they swung first. The simple fact that Zimmerman chose to follow and approach a man he himself believed to be a potential threat even after the cops told him it wasn't neccesary? Zimmerman should have a difficult time claiming self-defense because of that alone. This is sort of why cops are so against vigilante justice, because yes, aside from the obvious endangerment of yourself in the situation itself, charging head-on into danger can actually make things more difficult for you in court, because now we have to examine if you overstepped your boundaries as a citizen and somehow caused the situation to escalate. The second thing, and I assume the Stand-Your-Ground law kinda makes this moot, is that another condition for self defense is that you use "reasonable force." What this means is that if a thief on the street tries to take your wallet and comes at you swinging, you can't just pull a gun and shoot him dead. You need to try to use the mildest method to take care of the problem. In Zimmerman's case, even if Trayvond had truly attacked him first, the reasonable reaction would be to either run away, punch back, and MAYBE you could argue a knife would be acceptable, depending on the conditions. (For example if Zimmerman was an easily excited or frightened person, or if Trayvond had an obvious visual size advantage over Zimmerman) A gun? No no, any court I know of (though again I'm in Germany) would immediately be screaming at him for being so quick to resort to killing. (assuming of course gun ownership were ever an issue here to begin with) As I said, the second might be moot entirely, but what amazes me is to simply know that if this case had taken place in any other modern country, Zimmerman would've been convicted of manslaughter. It's the kind of case that gets attention because it's a fringe case that highlights a CLEAR difference in the judicial system in states that have Stand Your Ground law. I remember in one of my very first classes, we were given an old case highlighting that a group of men convicted of manslaughter in the Britain would've been found innocent in Germany, because the reason they killed the person they did was because they were stranded at sea and at some point, decided that UNLESS they kill and eat their friend that was significantly weaker/sicker/closer to death than them, they were all going to die, and Germany ruled that as a form of self-defense/preservation whereas the Britain did not. That was kind of a shock for us cause it was like "wow, they'd still be alive if they just had a different country," and here it's "wow Zimmerman would be behind bars if he lived basically anywhere else." Finally, and this kind of baffles me.... I saw snippets of the case where they were trying to point out Trayvond as a racist. What the **** does this matter? Listen, if I shoot a guy I believe to be my old college professor who I hate and I want him dead for no other reason than that he flunked me out of a class and I hate him for it, but as it turns out, the person I was aiming at was actually Adolf Hitler and I was mistaken, this does NOT excuse me for being guilty of murder. I had no idea it was Hitler; my intent was that of a criminal and a man lies dead so objectively I've succeeded in commiting murder. It's the same thing here: Zimmerman had no idea who Trayvond was, had no way of hearing anything Trayvond said and wouldn't know if Trayvond was a racist, a drug dealer, a murderer or a man who lights kittens on fire in his free time. To him, Trayvond was just "some black kid," so the entire issue of Trayvond being racist or not is highly irrelevant. I'm not so much surprised the prosecution would try including something like that anyways, I am however surprised the judge and the court allowed such irrelevant BS to make it into court. That? That truly amazes me. And of course the last thing that baffles me is how people can hail Zimmerman as a hero. Again, even IF we were to find out tomorrow that Trayvond planned on blowing up a school or something, that doesn't make Zimmerman a hero. He did what he did for all the wrong reasons. At best, you can excuse Zimmerman and argue what he did was "reasonable" (AKA it's sad circumstances, but Zimmerman reacted reasonably and simply feared for his life), but a hero? At worst, he's a highly negligent, overzealous coward without a grip on reality who just shot a kid because his heroism fantasy came crashing down on him in the form of harsh reality; why is THIS view not more common? Not saying people SHOULD view him that way, but between hero and coward, I'd definitely opt for the latter.

Oh dear god.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6A_mFu0hWgg

Yeah, **** elves.

Ya how dare she laugh and smile.

But then how will you gain power to use your Thu'um?!?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tu52b4Fl9FQ

I disagree with this, and another Courier-like character is what I'd like to see. The Courier had implications about his past, however minor, and a general trend with how people reacted to him, typically calling him lucky and a tough badass. He also had dialog options that were rather suave and hilarious. Tossed in were random things like how the Courier apparently had some sort of fixation with eyebots and/or the Enclave logo (dialog with Ulysses, the fact that the Courier himself initiates the quest to repair ED-E of his own free will, not at the whim of someone else). I like this. It was enough character to make you curious about who he was and curious about his past, while simultaneously being vague (locations he's visited), unimportant (Enclave fixation) or shrug-offable enough (comments about how tough he is; just a matter of the NPC's impression, doesn't make it true) that it didn't interfere with your own character. This is what I want. I want to be able to roleplay while also watching the Courier's story unfold. I want to see this repeat in Project Eternity. Which games do this?

Starting with this one:

... I didn't know that. D: I completely misunderstood it, I thought as long as the amount above your tier is 8$ or greater, you can join the Order. If I'd known that I have to add 8$ on top of my +20$ for the expansion, I would have! Well, my name is already on the list of to-be-added-to-the-Order so I will immediately go and donate another 8$ via PayPal. I hope that counts. edit: Great, and my title was actually changed. Now I feel like crap. I'll donate 10$ via PayPal to make up for this. Wait you only needed to donate $28 to be in the order? ****. I qualified lulz.

New Vegas offered 8 companions and New Vegas is teh Jesus of vidya gaems.

I know. :C Damn it Obsidian, you broke the rules of the trope.

Did you somehow miss that he was talking to Obsidian's token black guy when he asked that question? That made it even worse. :D

I am, but y'know, that's besides the point. Point is sing more karaoke.

Thanks, and no matter. I'll nail all the reasons why New Vegas is better than Skyrim straight into their skulls like a gift from Caesar. Plus it seems to work as I've had multiple people PM me saying "wow you were right" and saying they can't go back to Skyrim after trying New Vegas. Hell I even go to give it a try, with him crediting me in that vid. :D And I'm only here occassionally, since the New Vegas forums are over there. I'm sure I'll start showing up more once the game is released, but until then, that's my home.

Obsidian sings Journey is amazing, you are just jealous.

Aaaaaaand they just blew the mic singing it. Gosh I hope my $50 donation is worth more than their mic.

I cried tears of joy when they sang Don't Stop Believin'

I finally got Avellone to sing Don't Stop Believin'. Well at least a small portion of it. Still, was worth every penny of my pledge. I can die happy now.

Yep, I was just expecting some sort of confirmation or whatever to take place first, so surprised me how quick it went. Look at me everyone, I'm a backer! \o/