Valsuelm

I grew thinking as many people on this forum do. That the cops were the good guys. That they only arrested, shot, bothered, etc 'bad people'; 'criminals', with super few exceptions (I had seen Serpico and the like, and had heard some stories of bad cops but I didn't really believe them (as so many do not, and I'm sure that will read this and not)). Then I took a field trip to NYC my senior year of high school and had my first bad experience with a cop that started me questioning the idea that the police were the good guys. If that had been my only bad experience with the police, I would have probably thought the cops were the good guys a lot longer than I did. But it wasn't. I've since had similar experiences as the the Uber driver in NYC, in New Jersey (not sure the town), in my home town, in the next city over (where I even had a cop pull a gun on me), in the city I went to college in, and from the NY State Troopers on a highway. What this cop did, is normal. The likelihood of something happening to him as a result of this incident is near nil, and if anything does it will be a slap on the wrist for public relations sake. Corruption and abuse is the rule with NYC police, not the exception. Are all cops like this? Definitely not. I've met some good ones (or at least they were good (as in treating me respectfully) while I was talking to them). But a real lot of them are not. (I've also personally witnessed a cop mistreating someone else that treated me well as the cop perceived the other person to have less money than myself (less likely to hire a good lawyer; cops abuse the poor more than anyone else because they generally get away with it). Most cops are thugs, and that's the truth. For the most part the only ones doing any good are the detectives, not the revenue raising harassers that wear blue. And that's not to say some detectives aren't corrupt ****s either, I personally know some that are. But they generally aren't harassing as many people as often as the boys in blue. It's honestly almost laughable to me that some people are surprised by this behavior, especially in light of all the police abuse videos that have been circulating the world these last few years. I guess cell phone cameras are good for one thing: highlighting the police abuse and misconduct that a lot of people have known about for years, yet a large portion of the populace is conditioned by decades of radio, TV, and movies to think the cops are the good guys.... so even when presented with evidence they either pretend they aren't seeing what they are, or pretend that it's the exception to the rule.

Startpage is just google through a proxy. I'd only use it if you actually want google results. I recommend ixquick or duckduckgo as better alternatives to google. Of course there's other alternatives (that track you near as much or as much as google does though) such as Yahoo, Bing, Ask, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=088iKjUnRys

Well sometimes punitive legal steps are necessary to get people to do the right thing, so yes you are right. This bill would have prevented businesses and people from being sued if they had refused to serve members of the LGBT community. And I'm not even talking about marriage or churches which we understand are different, I am talking about commercial entities. So of course this would cause frustration and offense. So yes this bill needs to be amended so people can't use the law to discriminate ..that's the whole point That's called tyranny. It's not necessary. It's evil. What you think is a good idea is no more a good idea than a law that says a man can't stick his weewee in another man's bunghole, even if both men are cool with it.

As president I'd ban Ryan Reynolds from being in movies. My constitution has been buffed to 18. I can implement whatever I want. You got that backwards. It's been dumped to below even 3. The most successful evil tyrants have doublespeak come naturally to them, so you're well on your way.

Good thing the President has no such constitutional powers to implement such a thing. Oh wait.... lack of legal constitutional authority hasn't stopped Presidents in the past, especially in recent times. Wo...

Makes a change though from the great US of A to always appear to think that nothing exists outside of their borders. We in the EU have been shafted or years and continue to be so regarding games versions and release dates. Think how we have felt for years. I really have no sympathy if you're referring to games or any other product produced in the US or anywhere else outside of whatever nation you live in, especially when you cop such an attitude. Whatever the product, making it available first in the nation in which it is produced it what's generally done, for all sorts of good reasons.

Eh... I wouldn't be so sure. Of all the folks in the field right now, I think he probably has the best shot. Of course it's quite early, and there's a lot that remains to be seen.

There's something fundamentally wrong with the fact that a game developed and produced in the U.S. is not available for retail purchase in the U.S., yet is in Europe. This likely has something to do with the fact that Obsidian contracted with a European company to publish the game. A move that I'm more and more thinking was bigtime fail.

This conversation has been had before on this forum. In a truly free nation people have the right to associate with whom they wish, and to not associate with whomever they don't want to, for whatever reason under the sun they might have, good or bad. The law itself is a reaction to other laws and lawsuits, that for the most part are draconian, in some cases unconstitutional, and in some cases (if not most or all) reactive laws themselves. (Reactive laws generally suck all around). In reality, people are denied service in various businesses and organizations all the time for all sorts of reasons. There generally is absolutely nothing wrong with that, in a free nation. But yea... a helluva lot of hullabaloo about not much at all. Oh, and as an aside. The NCAA is a ****wit of an organization.

Barry was before my time. But hes probably the only man of any prominence in politics after World War 2 that might have my vote for President.

It's one hour. And here's my vote to have the limit removed.

Dags certainly wasn't talking about where I live, or where a lot of other people live.

On topic: In short, the controversy is more than likely a helluva lot of hullabaloo about not that much, if anything substantial or reasonable. Red herring, smokescreen, distraction, possible culture subversion, what have you. In the grand scheme of things it's likely not all that important, but it tugs at the emotional strings of the not very well informed populace with attention spans not much greater than rabbits on crack. The overwhelming vast majority of which probably has never actually read the law, yet they have strong emotional thoughts on it. Such is the way of the cracked rabb... errr shee... erm... average pop cultured Joe. Link the actual law rather than some 'news' articles about it and perhaps we can have an informed discussion.

Damnit General! You missed the SJW event of the year (so far) yesterday. Without your lead, the SWJs didnt fare so well.

I have not used this myself, so I don't know if it works 100% or not, but here's a an editor for PoE that you might be able to use to do what you're looking to do.

Obsidian has pledged that there will be no DLCs, and thank everyone's favorite deity for that. Paradox of course would DLC like mad, nickle and diming PoE players as much as they could. Fortunately they are not in charge of development. By all that is holy, hopefully they never will be.

Because there's just too much good music about Trannies, and all of these people would be cool with the headstone.

Divine would have been cool with the headstone, so would Dr. Frank N. Furter. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNPaMloebRM

Armed Trannies Attack The NSA Headline of the year so far methinks.

There you go. Dissenting opinions will not be tolerated. And since you can't block selectively you are not interested in anything said by anyone on any topic if you don't agree with their politics. Good job. He may never see this, since he 'promptly put them on ignore/block/whatever' (where them = Ron Paul fanboys). Considering I've never seen a Ron Paul fanboy on this forum, I imagine he must be talking about yourself, myself, and the few other folks who ever said they liked Ron as a candidate on this forum. Apparently liking someone as a candidate makes you a fanboy in his mind. I wouldn't sweat it, as his is a very misinformed and deluded mind. Most troll minds are.