I would really like to get into the nine different kinds of irony and symbolism that Jim seems to be working with, but I can't get over how much it looks like he's getting a BJ during the first few frames of that video.
If you're in America, then the 2nd amendment automatically deals with such issues i.e. limiting of acquiring arms is illegal as per the Constitution. No more needs to be said about that.mike1921 said:Cars have an important transportation function, knives have an important culinary function. You can't compare a weapon to a practical tool. Guns make it easier to kill larger amounts of people and serve such a small function in civilized life. It's reasonable to require a background check for them, and to limit clip size so that you can only kill so many people with one if you're a murderer. If you're going to say this is about people wanting to ban all guns then point me to one American politican, they have to be at the level of a governor,congressman, president/VP or cabinet member, who supports such a thing. I have never heard rhetoric of banning all guns from any one important besides people using it as a strawman.
The bold part is your problem, tasers are not what you would call reliable. Watch any video where an officer is trying to subdue a suspect using a taser. One hand aiming the taser, the other on his sidearm. In many situations where he is not, his life is at risk. I've seen officers get shot because they thought the taser was going to work. Instead, the suspect just shakes it off or is at least able to shoot. Pepper spray is no different, if you eat enough spicy food (not crazy amounts, just on a regular basis) you're practically immune to it.Jaden Kazega said:Pretty much this.
I think there is one important question which should be asked that no one seems to be asking: why are all of the non-lethal ammunition types banned from public use, or illegal for private citizens to use? I haven't done any in-depth research on this, so don't take what I say as 100% fact, but as far as I can tell all forms of non-lethal measures to stop and/or incapacitate an attacker are illegal for private citizens to own (IE: rubber bullets, disrupter rounds, sandbag rounds, pepper spray bullets, taser rounds -- and yes, those last two types DO exist). Why is this? I see real bullets being needed for hunting purposes for specific kinds of rifles, but why not avail all of the non-lethal measures to the public? Then there would no longer be the need for citizens to carry live ammunition to defend themselves, but this is just in my opinion.
On that same note, why (at least in California) are there only five types of taser a citizen is allowed to own? The rest are for peace officers only. Again, why limit stopping power of a non-lethal level to only law enforcement rather than the general public? I know I would have no qualms about owning a gun if I had access to non-lethal ammunition types, or A RELIABLE TASER....
I really don't want to turn this into a debate thread, honestly, I am just genuinely curious about this. lol
And possibly confusing.Thunderous Cacophony said:Taking on gun fans and the indie scene in the same video... This comment section will be interesting.
That they are sentient artifacts from the pits of Hell manufactured by dark incantations taught to us by creatures from the 13th dimension?Adam Jensen said:Yahtzee tackled my favorite issues in politics and video game industry. It's absolutely insane how long people can go on denying the obvious truth about guns.
I agree. Shootings are just as likely to happen with video games. Ideas are just as lethal as bullets, and if we just showed pictures to people, we'd have the same end result. There is a direct correlation between games/books and violence, and the nirvana fallacy is a strong argument in favour of firearms.RJ 17 said:Yeah yeah, I'll bight. Guns are no more to blame than games, movies, books, pictures, and spoken word. Crazy people will do crazy things whether or not they have a gun to do them with.
Political differences aside, I still enjoyed both poems, though the meter in Jim's seemed a bit off.
Though neither are the reason for Yahtzee's segment today. Not that I disagree, it just seems weird to be even having this discussion when the core of the mockery here is the notion that certain bodies have effectively said "these shootings are out of hand and have to stop....LET'S BAN VIDEO GAMES!"Legion said:Very true, although I think it's a very small minority who think that guns actually cause violence. It's more about how easy they make it.
Guns are srs business and the simple implication that guns might be a problem is such to trigger a rote response in most 'Murricans.Deshin said:[I guess everybody just missed the joke?
Moves to America? What? They're from California.RJ 17 said:Certainly would fit with the pretentiousness of indie games. Green Day moves to America so they can make it big as a rock band and then spend all their time bitching about America.Jim's game should have a Green Day soundtrack
I wanna be a minority!
I think it's a great book that for some reason almost everyone reads wrong. When I read it I thought it was a clear example of an unreliable narrator - a protagonist who's surrounded by well-meaning people who want to do right by him and who keeps rejecting them all. But I appear to be in the minority and everyone else seems to think he's an insightful teenager who really is seeing through everyone else's phoniness.Desert Punk said:I am so very glad that I took Film as Literature instead of the garbage that was American Lit in High School.WaitWHAT said:Yeah. I remember that. God, it was terrible. The main character spent the entire book whining something to the tune of "WHY WON'T EVERYONE ACCOMMODATE MY TERRIBLE MISTAKES AND GIVE ME EVERYTHING I WANT?! WHHHHHYYYY?!?!"DVS BSTrD said:And if this video proves anything, it's that Catcher in the Rye will always suck ass.
I got to skip that shitty book completely!
So, is it your opinion that the 2nd Amendment allows anyone to buy a nuclear missile?furai47 said:If you're in America, then the 2nd amendment automatically deals with such issues i.e. limiting of acquiring arms is illegal as per the Constitution. No more needs to be said about that.
Thirded. What a whiney little douche for a protagonist. My English teacher for senior year said that book inspired the assassination of John Lennon, but I think that guy would have done it regardless. You can't blame anything but the crazy people for their actions.RJ 17 said:Seconded.DVS BSTrD said:And if this video proves anything, it's that Catcher in the Rye will always suck ass.
Wait, I thought all the members of Green Day were from Berkeley, CA? I live near there, and there's a huge fan following throughout Alameda County.Certainly would fit with the pretentiousness of indie games. Green Day moves to America so they can make it big as a rock band and then spend all their time bitching about America.Jim's game should have a Green Day soundtrack
I wanna be a minority!
Make a gun that shoots shurikens and lightning please!Vhite said:I am indie gun developer and find this offensive.
Based on the rest of your comment I'm not sure what country you live in, but in the US you can do all those things without a driver's license, and you don't need to register your car to own it. In the US you only need a license to drive on public roads, and you only need to register your car if you want to take it on public roads.Callate said:...And if I could get a car at a car show without having to have a license, take both a written and a competency test, renew my car's registration every year, and periodically prove that I was still competent to drive a car, there would probably be a lot more auto deaths.
No, that's hyperbole that nobody actually advocates.Mahoshonen said:So, is it your opinion that the 2nd Amendment allows anyone to buy a nuclear missile?furai47 said:If you're in America, then the 2nd amendment automatically deals with such issues i.e. limiting of acquiring arms is illegal as per the Constitution. No more needs to be said about that.
I'm honestly curious just how broad you (and other pro-gun right advoctes) are willing to stretch this bit of logic.
Just because someone has a gun does not automatically mean they're going to shoot a human with it. In fact, the vast majority of people who own guns have absolutely no intention of using it on a human. You were indeed right in saying that a gun is just a tool, what that tool does is dependent entirely on the person that's using it. A hunter who owns a gun has no intention of using it on a human being, they intend to use it to hunt animals. A home owner who has a gun for home/personal defense has no intention of using it on a human being, to have such an intent would mean that they intend for their home to be invaded thereby justifying their use of a gun on a person.ExtraDebit said:Except that guns is a tool that empowers, there's a difference between mad with power and mad without power. A mad man with the power of a gun or to launch a nuke is much more dangerous than one without.RJ 17 said:Yeah yeah, I'll bight. Guns are no more to blame than games, movies, books, pictures, and spoken word. Crazy people will do crazy things whether or not they have a gun to do them with.
Political differences aside, I still enjoyed both poems, though the meter in Jim's seemed a bit off.
Both guns and games are two different perspective taking on the same situation. One claims that we should take away things that make people mad and one claims that we should take away power for mad people to minimize damage. However, taking away power from the mad is a much more sound solution while weather games make people mad is still indebate.
So, is your opinion that medical research is completely fine to be done on infants rather than lab rats? Rifles and nuclear missiles are about in the same relationship as those two and frankly, if you can't distinguish a bomb that upon detonation kills thousands (if detonated above a residential area) and a gun that, unless you have people standing in line or are lucky with ricochet, kills one person at a time you are not suited to have a conversation about gun rights.Mahoshonen said:So, is it your opinion that the 2nd Amendment allows anyone to buy a nuclear missile?furai47 said:If you're in America, then the 2nd amendment automatically deals with such issues i.e. limiting of acquiring arms is illegal as per the Constitution. No more needs to be said about that.
I'm honestly curious just how broad you (and other pro-gun right advoctes) are willing to stretch this bit of logic.