Random Politics & Religion #07 |
||
Random Politics & Religion #07
Imagine in 4 years when you will see Kanye and the Kardashians clan up on that stage to win the nomination!
Offline
Posts: 35422
I'm still holding out hope that I somehow get adopted by Trump and then I can use that money to make FFXI great again !
Ramyrez said: » Anna Ruthven said: » If it's to benefit those who died I don't see a problem with it, I can certainly see why some are offended but I don't think there should be anything done to stop it. I do think a background check should be performed before the prize is handed over though. Well clearly, from the sensible standpoint. Again, I think it's just free press and a good cause, really. The only potential embarrassment would be if that gun was won by someone who then committed a crime with it. It's a gamble. Speaking of revolvers, that S&W 629 Stealth Hunter .44 Mag. I want one. >.> Offline
Posts: 35422
Anna Ruthven said: » Ramyrez said: » Anna Ruthven said: » If it's to benefit those who died I don't see a problem with it, I can certainly see why some are offended but I don't think there should be anything done to stop it. I do think a background check should be performed before the prize is handed over though. Well clearly, from the sensible standpoint. Again, I think it's just free press and a good cause, really. The only potential embarrassment would be if that gun was won by someone who then committed a crime with it. It's a gamble. Speaking of revolvers, that S&W 629 Stealth Hunter .44 Mag. I want one. >.> I'm all for people having guns but a forum moderator with a gun is a step too far... Ramyrez said: » Anna Ruthven said: » I don't think it'd be right to but I'd love to see the look on his face when they say someone else's name. I don't think it would be the "right" thing to do as, sadly, it is the will of the people. I do think it's the right thing to do from a moral standpoint. -.-; I don't care if they nominated Charles Manson in Trump's place. I'd still love to see it. fonewear said: » Anna Ruthven said: » Ramyrez said: » Anna Ruthven said: » If it's to benefit those who died I don't see a problem with it, I can certainly see why some are offended but I don't think there should be anything done to stop it. I do think a background check should be performed before the prize is handed over though. Well clearly, from the sensible standpoint. Again, I think it's just free press and a good cause, really. The only potential embarrassment would be if that gun was won by someone who then committed a crime with it. It's a gamble. Speaking of revolvers, that S&W 629 Stealth Hunter .44 Mag. I want one. >.> I'm all for people having guns but a forum moderator with a gun is a step too far... Anna Ruthven said: » Ramyrez said: » Anna Ruthven said: » If it's to benefit those who died I don't see a problem with it, I can certainly see why some are offended but I don't think there should be anything done to stop it. I do think a background check should be performed before the prize is handed over though. Well clearly, from the sensible standpoint. Again, I think it's just free press and a good cause, really. The only potential embarrassment would be if that gun was won by someone who then committed a crime with it. It's a gamble. Speaking of revolvers, that S&W 629 Stealth Hunter .44 Mag. I want one. >.> They have drawings and raffles on occasion for a Memorial Alumni Fund for my high school for a childhood friend of mine who died in Afghanistan for various types of hunting/sporting/camping gear and I'll enter those. Once it was an AR-15. A few other rifles. I've never won, but ah well. Great cause, really. Valefor.Sehachan said: » Imagine in 4 years when you will see Kanye and the Kardashians clan up on that stage to win the nomination! *feels his ulcer growing* Offline
Posts: 35422
2020 with global warming and terrorism I don't know if we will make it to 2018 !
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/06/30/europe/turkey-istanbul-ataturk-airport-attack/index.html
Quote: Turkish officials have strong evidence that the Istanbul airport attackers came to the country from the ISIS stronghold of Raqqa in Syria and that ISIS leadership was involved in the planning of the attack, a senior Turkish government source told CNN Thursday. Officials believe the men -- identified by another Turkish official and state media as being from Russia, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan -- entered Turkey about a month ago from Raqqa, bringing along with them the suicide vests and bombs used in the attack, the source said. They rented an apartment in the Fatih district of Istanbul, where one of the attackers left behind his passport, the Turkish government source told CNN. The attack -- which left 43 people dead -- was "extremely well planned with ISIS leadership involved," the source said. While no one has yet claimed responsibility for the airport assault, CNN contributor Michael Weiss, author of "ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror," said the nationalities revealed Thursday buttress the claim of ISIS involvement. "One of the toughest battalions in ISIS is called the Uzbek battalion," he said. "These were the guys who were essentially on the front lines guarding Falluja, the city they just lost in Iraq." "Ask anybody inside ISIS or who's fought ISIS. People from the former Soviet Union tend to be the most battle-hardened and willing to die," he said. CNN national security analyst Peter Bergen said the revelation of the Istanbul attackers' nationalities will serve to "open people's eyes to the fact that there's a very substantial Russian, former Soviet Union, presence within ISIS, both in terms of the foot soldiers and the leaders." Estimates of Russian fighters involved with ISIS range from 2,000 to 7,000, he said. Newest dog whistle in the fight against racism, brownies.
Quote: pot-browniesAn elementary school in Collingswood, New Jersey called the police after a nine-year-old children made a “racist” comment about brownies during an end-of-the-year party. On June 16, a third-grader made a comment about the brownies that had been given to the class as a snack. That comment prompted another third-grader to claim that the first comment was racist. The staff at William P. Tatem Elementary School determined that this rose to the level of a police matter and called the local fuzz. Stacy dos Santos, the mother of the first boy, claims that his comment was only about the brownies and was not racial in nature. “He said they were talking about brownies… Who exactly did he offend?” she asked The Philadelphia Inquirer. Dos Santos said that her son– who is Brazilian on his father’s side– was “traumatized” by the police officer’s line of questioning. “He was intimidated, obviously. There was a police officer with a gun in the holster talking to my son, saying, ‘Tell me what you said.’ He didn’t have anybody on his side.” Im not sure what invokes the biggest "***" response from me. That someone was called racist for speaking about brownies. That the school thought it was a big enough deal to CALL THE COPS. That the COPS ACTUALLY CAME to the school and interrogated the 9 year old. Or that ultimately CPS got involved in the end. All the people involved that get a paycheck from public funds should lose their jobs over this. All I know is I can think of two separate instances where I'd have been arrested in high school if they happened today and I maintain that I did absolutely nothing wrong the one, and only responded inappropriately to an already-wrong situation beyond my control in the other.
People are so afraid of lawsuits and the like and I'm really not sure there's political correctness to blame for that as much a justice system that allows for far, far too many frivolous lawsuits. Ramyrez said: » All I know is I can think of two separate instances where I'd have been arrested in high school if they happened today and I maintain that I did absolutely nothing wrong the one, and only responded inappropriately to an already-wrong situation beyond my control in the other. People are so afraid of lawsuits and the like and I'm really not sure there's political correctness to blame for that as much a justice system that allows for far, far too many frivolous lawsuits. That's an interesting notion. Which came first? Frivolous lawsuits or PC culture? Ragnarok.Nausi said: » Which came first? Frivolous lawsuits or PC culture? They certainly feed each other. Literally, almost. Read that earlier, found it more interesting that they call the cops all the time up there instead of dealing with the situations.
*** NJ. Ramyrez said: » All I know is I can think of two separate instances where I'd have been arrested in high school if they happened today and I maintain that I did absolutely nothing wrong the one, and only responded inappropriately to an already-wrong situation beyond my control in the other. People are so afraid of lawsuits and the like and I'm really not sure there's political correctness to blame for that as much a justice system that allows for far, far too many frivolous lawsuits. Asura.Calatilla said: » No win no fee lawyers aren't helping the cause either. People will sue over anything because it don't matter if they lose the case. You don't know the half of it. Or maybe you do, ***, I don't know what you do for a living. Though admittedly, that's "limited" to largely disability/malpractice/personal injury because no-win-no-fee lawyers are pretty dependent upon the subject of said suits having the money to pony up.
I hate the fact a criminal can sue me if he gets injured while robbing my house. The idea that he was in my house illegally to begin with is apparently a non-issue these days.
Caitsith.Shiroi said: » You can sue anyone for anything, it doesn't mean you are going to win. But the very act is a potentially very expensive inconvenience that in and of itself can *** up someone's life miserably. That's why the Church of Scientology and Mr. Trump rely so heavily upon it. They may or may not have a leg to stand on, but they'll pester you with shameless insubstantial lawsuits until you're not a problem for them because they can afford to do so without breaking a sweat. Caitsith.Shiroi said: » No, shooting a burglar running over property theft is not legal. Running, no, but if they're still in your house I can't think of many juries that would (or should) convict you. Caitsith.Shiroi said: » Asura.Calatilla said: » I hate the fact a criminal can sue me if he gets injured while robbing my house. The idea that he was in my house illegally to begin with is apparently a non-issue these days. You can sue anyone for anything, it doesn't mean you are going to win. No, shooting a burglar running over property theft is not legal. Trump is the king of frivolous law suits lol...
I never actually anything about shooting them, there are many ways a burgler can get injured while in the act of committing a crime. One story a read awhile ago, the family dog attacked a burgler and they were ordered to put it down because it was a danger to society.
Caitsith.Shiroi said: » Asura.Calatilla said: » I hate the fact a criminal can sue me if he gets injured while robbing my house. The idea that he was in my house illegally to begin with is apparently a non-issue these days. You can sue anyone for anything, it doesn't mean you are going to win. No, shooting a burglar running over property theft is not legal. Imagine this... A man hops over barb wired fences laced with warning signs for trespass and death by electrocution to steel some wire so he can sell it only to die... Now this persons family brings suit against the company and wins a judgement of millions of dollars... It's happened more than a few times no matter how ridiculous it is... Asura.Calatilla said: » I never actually anything about shooting them, there are many ways a burgler can get injured while in the act of committing a crime. One story a read awhile ago, the family dog attacked a burgler and they were ordered to put it down because it was a danger to society. I'd have to be in a cell before I let you harm a hair on my dog for injuring someone who is there to hurt his people. That's an emotional response. Not very logical or reasonable, even. But it's what I feel to be the right one either way. Lakshmi.Flavin said: » Trump is the king of frivolous law suits lol... Caitsith.Shiroi said: » Asura.Calatilla said: » I hate the fact a criminal can sue me if he gets injured while robbing my house. The idea that he was in my house illegally to begin with is apparently a non-issue these days. You can sue anyone for anything, it doesn't mean you are going to win. No, shooting a burglar running over property theft is not legal. Yeah but your house wasn't up to code, good thing that the criminal found out your structure was criminal. I agree its stupid especially when building code issues trump breaking an entry. |
||
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.
|