Syco21
-
Posts
422 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Syco21
-
-
But it's coffee, that's the joke.
-
Each and every person is an individual since each and every person is different. IMHO it's impossible for anyone to stop that. Sure,plenty of people look the same for whatever the reason but that doesn't mean they are. People don't share the same actions,thoughts,emotions and experiences. It just can't happen.
Now,about the title's question. I'd say it's in opposition to our societies since they try so hard to turn everyone into a homogeneous blob and its main weapons (but not only weapons) are tv,internet and music.
You are completely ignoring the fact that all of those things pulls the individual in many different directions.
-
Everyone everywhere is prejudiced in some way or another, whether they realize it or not. It's not always a bad thing either.
For example, you have a new neighbor move into your neighborhood. You find out that they served time for molesting children. So you make sure they are not around your children while alone. That is prejudice. You judged that person as an active threat to your children and have responded in what you believe to be an appropriate fashion. You did so without knowing them. But no one can truly fault you for that. You have no way of knowing whether they will harm your children or not, you have only their past actions to go by.
It's only ever when the reaction to the information exceeds that which is reasonable. Keeping a former child predator away from your kids is reasonable. Keeping your kids away from the Muslim family that just moved in because terrorists! or whatever, is not.
You grew up around black people who only ever spoke with the stereotypical black accent. There is nothing wrong with being surprised that a black man can speak with a different accent. It seem stupid to you now in hindsight. But if you had no experience with black people speaking with any other accent, it is understandable. It is not harmful either, it is neutral. Especially since you did not let it negatively impact your interaction with that person.
I hate this idea that prejudice is always harmful. It's BS as I have pointed out above with my example of a person that had been convicted of sex crimes against kids. Furthermore there is a major difference between prejudice and bigotry. Bigotry always involves prejudice, but prejudice does not always involve bigotry.
As with all things, prejudice in moderation is good, even beneficial. It is an extension of instinct. But it is very easy to let that get out of hand and become something harmful.
Edit: One last thing. I notice in your post, KVN, that you mention color repeatedly but nothing else. It is very important to note that prejudice doesn't only exist for skin color, but can manifest in everything. Anytime you pass judgment on a person due to a small faucet of who they are it is prejudice.
-
Well, I have a combat knife, a screw driver, a zippo, zippo fluid, a gun, two cats, a huge old school TV, kitchen knives, a pockt knife and two swords.
I'm surviving. If I have to choose one, it's going to be the combat knife. Gun is already on my hip and folding knife is in my pocket. :cool:
-
music/artist
Not even by album. I don't really change the file names. I prefer just track name and use the metatag to keep track of artist name and album,
Buuuuut, I have music from so many different genres and subgenres including songs in different genres from the same artists and like you, songs that belong in multiple genres, it's just a cluster f*#@.
It sucks in that sometimes I just want to listen to music from a certain genre or a subgenre and it's kinda hard to wade through relatively small library to find those songs.
But then, that's what playlists are for.
-
So, what would happen if we simply dropped the Gun Free zones?You might just get another Joel Myrick. But that would be just terrible. At least according to Bloomberg & Pals anyway.
-
"The good guy isn't point(ing) his gun at anyone" makes no sense as an answer because the statement was, "The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun." If the good guy isn't pointing his gun at anyone, then exactly how does he stop the bad guy with a gun and what is the purpose of the good guys gun?
I'd appreciate you clarifying exactly how you see the good guy stopping the bad guy and what the statement, "The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun." means to you or how you interpret it.
My initial thought though is that this didn't particularly work well in the recent Vegas shooting. The armed good guy died when he tried to shoot the bad guy.
My next thought is that suppose I am a good guy with a gun and I hear a gun shot. I turn around to see a guy shooting. Is he a good guy stopping a bad guy or a bad guy shooting at someone?
As I said, I don't disagree, I'd just like an explanation of how this works so the good guys with guns stop the bad guys with guns.
If you don't know who is the aggressor and who is the defender, you do not get involved. What it means is when you're sitting in Luby's and some dude smashes his car through the window and starts shooting people, you are able to stop him before he can kill your parents.
Not every single situation is going to be helped by a good guy with a gun. There might come a time when the good guy arrives too late to help and can only call 911. The statement is about situations that go down with an armed good guy present, who will know what's going on and how to respond.
She, the third victim was a she. It's extremely unfortunate what occured in Las Vegas. It doesn't disprove the notion that good guys with guns can and do stop bad guys with guns. Not every situation will have a happy ending, even if the good guy is armed. It's not some bullet proof measure. Like carrying a spare tire, in most cases it is extremely helpful. Sometimes though you will get multiple flats and your spare isn't going to be much use. Doesn't mean you shouldn't carry a spare.
There have been a number of times when an armed citizen stopped a bad guy. Best of all, there are even times when they didn't even have to pull their guns. Like what happened to me in Louisiana when a guy beating on his girlfriend decided to beat on me instead, or even better example, when a guy in Kennesaw Georgia stopped an armed robbery before it even begun and got the perps arrested by simply being there.
-
I'd rather have a complete reboot of the series than any further acknowledgement of Stargate: Voyag-- I mean, Universe. Talk about awful. That show's 40 episodes did more to ruin a once great franchise than any reboot could ever do.
That being said, I do hope that Richard Dean Anderson at least has a humourous throw-away cameo at some point. Doesn't even have to be as O'Neill. He could be a nameless hobo for all I care. He just has to be in it.
He probably wont be, as I said. This isn't a reboot of the series, it's a reboot of the movie. They are wildly different canons. Roland Emmerich hates the show with a passion.
It's going to be like if they rebooted Star Trek as a show about guys on a sea ship.
-
Justice seems to be a subjective word. Everyone has their own opinion of what it means. But it seems to me that most people can agree in most cases that justice is proving guilt before exacting punishment.
Revenge is exacting punishment before proving guilt. It's emotion based, whereas justice is evidence based. To say they are the same thing because they can sometimes have in the same end result is like saying that trains are the same thing as cars because both can get you from Austin to Houston.
-
Do not disagree with the opinion, but I do find one part somewhat confusing. "The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun."
So, who picks the good guy and how is he (or she) identified as "good" or "bad" and how long does the designation remain valid?
No one gets to pick who the good guy is and who the bad guy is, each individual makes that decision for themself when they decide whether to be either a productive or destructive member of society.
How do you pick out the good guys from the bad guys? Insanely easily. The good guy isn't point his gun at anyone.
-
Don't get so excited. This is a reboot of the movie, not the TV franchise. They are radically different.
-
I am a night owl. My day starts in the mid to late afternoon and ends midmorning. This has always been the norm for me. What's more, if I go a year or whatver working a 'normal day shift' then go unemployed, I will quickly revert to a night schedule naturally, without trying to do so.
I am more energetic at night than I am in the day.
Edit:
I guess mine is down to social anxiety issues, really.This seems to contradict your statement. You say your natural waking hours are 9am to 2am. That is the best time to be awake if you are a social butterfly. There are far more people out and about socializing at 2am than there are at 7am, for example.
So it doesn't make sense to me if that was the actual reason. It's more likely to do with whatever work you do or have done than to do with any social issues like anxiety.
-
@Meta: You answered your own question. Multiple times. Anyone that played as a mage or one of those styles rendered impotent is going to hate Skyrim for that
For me. New Vegas did a lot of things better than Skyrim. I can't be bothered to remember what those are. But there are things I like about Skyrim.
I don't know. I'm not voting because I can't choose one over the other.
-
Colorwheel, they controlled both the house and the senate. They didn't have to compromise on anything.
-
I don't like Alex Jones, at all. But if his actions are indicative that he's bipolar, then what does that make Nancy Grace?
He's just passionate, stupid but passionate.
-
Last I checked, the democrats controlled the house during Bush's term and the house sets the budget. Ergo whatever policies Bush had, had to have been approved by the democrats.
-
Naomi, where is the proof that our gun rights don't work? Most murders in America are by gang members using illegal weapons. Where do they get these weapons? The U.S., or more specifically the ATF. Look up Operation Gunwalker and Operation Fast & Furious. There was a third I believe, can't remember the name though. Regardless both operations supplied thousands of weapons to drug cartels, and those are just the ones we know about. There are more that the ATF "lost track of."
Guns are used anywhere from 15 to 50 times more often for self defense than to illegally take a life. And the best part? The majority of defensive gun uses didn't even fire a single shot.
-
If it were Romney in office, the shoe would be on the other foot. Neither democrats nor republicans are innocent in the matter.
Both parties are trying to further their own agendas and if you think that either one of them is trying to help the American public, then you're sadly mistaken.
-
Fortunately for me,GinnyFizz, I'm 6'4" and a factory worker. I'm freaking huge. So in most cases I should just be able to give my would be assailant the "don't even think about it because I'd shatter you like a blown glass bottle" look and that'd be the end of. Unfortunately for others such as yourself, that wouldn't work too well. Especially against my size. That is the very reason I'm an advocate for less stringent gun laws and unlicensed carry. It would be virtually impossible for someone working a job with a lot of hours like mine to be able to make time to take the class and it's just about impossible for the poor to be able to buy a gun the ammo, range time and still afford the class. And it's usually the poor that need it the most. After all, look at Detroit. They have insane crime and their police force are taking huge cuts. The upper class are paying armed security contractors to patrol their neighborhoods. The middle class are buying carry and acquiring carry licenses and the poor... Well, they're poor so cares right?
I care and I'm sure you do too. Unfortunately those that would seek to increase the cost of the must effective means of self preservation don't seem to care as much.
Historically speaking, gun control has been specifically at those horrible evil, untrustworthy colored folk such as myself. If you don't believe me, do a little research. Start with the gun control laws of colonial America. You'll see.
Now what does all this have to do with Feinstein's bill? Well that bill would make every single handgun illegal more or less. My handgun certainly falls under the ban. The standard magazine size is 15 rounds. That's not an extended magazine. It's actually a lower capacity magazine because the original version of my gun held 16 rounds.
It's not extended it's not high capacity. It's less than what fits.
-
There's currently a proposed constitutional amendment that would repeal the term limits for president. This must be a highly popular initiative since it's been proposed. Amirite?
Just because bills have been proposed doesn't mean they're popular, that they'll ever make it out of committee, let alone to the president's desk.
Last I checked "shootings" was plural. Did that change?
You must be forgetting that the original AWB sunsetted in 2004 and couldn't get enough support to reinstate it. You must also be forgetting that Obama signed a bill removing the gun free zone designation from national parks. You must also be forgetting that many states have expanded gun rights. Most recently Oklahoma legalized open carry.
-
Naomi: I have more training than NYPD cops and most cops at other departments for that matter. Police firearms training is appallingly pathetic. That's why you have cops in New York shooting entire blocks. That's why bystanders are far more likely to be shot than the average citizen. By virtue of simply bring a gun enthusiast that goes to the range with any amount of frequency, we are at a default advantage over cops.
You want me to lock up my gun at the range? So you're saying I should have let my sisters boyfriend beat the living hell out of her? Those would be rape victims that shot their would be rapist should have just allowed themselves to be raped? Really?
Colourwheel: once again you're wrong. Before the recent shootings, support for reduction of gun control was at an all time high and support for gun control at an all time low.
-
I'm not a communist and I look out for my fellow man. I'm an idealist a pragmatist and hopefully one who will live to see the day when there will be no more Sandy Hooks or Dunblaines.
we'd all love for these things to never happen. unfortunately that's like asking the sun to not rise.
so, do you still believe the needs of the many outweigh the need of the few?
-
@Naomi: your communist argument, though you may not realize it, is in direct suppoRt of less gun control. guns are used anywhere from 15 to 50 times more for self defense than they are for murder. needs of the many, indeed.
@Color wheel: there ate still over 100,000,000 gun owners in America. of only 1% rebel against the law, that's still more than 1,000,000. if they are the only ones that die, that's still more than 120 years worth of gun murders. But hey, let's not let a trial matter such as the lives ofgun owners get in the way of a good knee jerk.
-
thousands, hundreds of thousands or even millions of people will die if Feinstein's ILLEGAL bill makes it into law. and for what? a kneejerk reaction to a none existent problem.
Male or Female PC? How come?
in Debates
Posted
Male, because I'm male. But I like to do at least one female run aswell just to see what, if anything, changes/