Naked Snake

Members
  • Content count

    11382
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Naked Snake

  • Rank
    HAHA I AM A FAG AND I CAN'T CHANGE THIS TITLE ANYMORE
  1. I don't blame them for taking over, the Gun Control Act was just another lubricant on the slippery slope. I'm not exactly pleased with their non-sensical ramblings and therefore am no longer a member, but I still don't support most of the proposed forms of "gun control" because I have genuine concerns over their implementation or effectiveness. A good example is the repeated call to ban "assault rifles / assault weapons". The problem lies in the fact that even if you take the pistol grip off a rifle and put it in a traditional-looking stock, you still end up with a semi-automatic firearm, so essentially you are just regulating the cosmetic appearance of a firearm, things that have zero impact on their ability to be used in a crime. One of the criteria that defines an "assault weapon" under current and proposed laws is a stock that telescopes in length to adjust for the height of different shooters. Can you really say with a straight face that a stock that is not rigid but instead adjusts to a person's physique makes it more useful in a crime or more deadly than a conventionally-stocked firearm? So yeah, of course I am going to oppose that, because it has zero impact on criminal usage and zero impact on the lethality of the weapon. A semi-automatic firearm, no matter what it looks like, is a dangerous weapon when misused. This is true of any firearm. Do I think that we need absolutely no new laws entirely? Of course not, there are certainly things we need to tighten up, like what records states have to forward to the NICS system. We CAN tackle this issue without abbrogating people's rights, just like we tackle all sorts of other issues without resorting to further reductions of civil liberties (shit like the PATRIOT Act not-withstanding).
  2. That's completely false, considering people who are "clinically insane" are already prohibited persons and have been since the Gun Control Act of 1968. The NRA supported the Gun Control Act, which did in fact create restrictions on who can buy firearms, where and how. Namely, it created the Federal Firearms License system for gun dealers, required them to conduct backround checks using a Form 4473 (it used to take a few days, now the FFL calls up the FBI National Instant Criminal Search hotline to conduct the backround check). It created criteria on who is a prohibited person (namely felons and those declared mentally defective). It requires a person purchasing a long gun from an FFL to be 18, or 21 for handguns. It does a bunch of other stuff too, if you want to know the other gritty details, it's on Wikipedia. The problem with using the terrorist watchlist to prohibit people from owning firearms is that there's absolutely no due process. It's a secret list, with secret criteria, and there's no known mechanism to have your name removed if it is on there incorrectly. Senator Ted Kennedy was infamously on the so-called "selectee list" and was constantly detained when attempting to travel by air, and he was a sitting Congressman. Children have been selected for additional screening due to having the same name as a person on the terrorist watchlist. I don't think it's unreasonable to be concerned about using a flawed mechanism which lacks due process when we're talking about restricting somebody's civil rights. If the government thinks people on their various watchlists are too dangerous to own a firearm, they should bring forth evidence before a judge in a public courtroom, make their case for the public record and determine the validity of the evidence presented to make a judgement. We already do this with restraining orders, which also prohibit a person from possessing or purchashing firearms. There should be a process to appeal the judgement, there should be mechanisms in place to prevent abuse of the system and to protect innocent people from being caught up in a dragnet. If the government can prove the person should be prohibited, then yes, they should be added to the NICS (National Instant Criminal Search) system as a prohibited person.
  3. One of the problems is the discussions being had are coming from two different ways of addressing the problem. One side is saying laws should be geared to punish criminal usage after the fact, another side says the best course of action is more regulation on civilian access. It results in a bunch of people talking over eachother instead of to eachother, and accusing eachother of not having the right approach to the issue.
  4. That's the joke. </Ranier Wolfcastle>
  5. I have a bazillion .30 cal ammo cans and a few .50s, the best one I have is a can for smoke mortars, it's pretty huge. Would be a good base for a rocket crate sprite, take a bunch of pictures and spritize it in an editor.
  6. *passes dutchie to the left* The King is dead, LONG LIVE THE KING!
  7. Dear Sir, The Effect You Wish To Attempt Requires A Scripting Language, Which Vanilla Doom Lacks Entirely. First You Figure Out What Source Port You Want To Use, And Then You RTFM And Find Out How To Utilize The Scripting Language To Achieve The Desired Effect. I Am Pretty Sure Eternity Engine Can Achieve This Effect, You'd Have To Look Though.
  8. You know, you're right and I never really considered the fact that Ultimate Doom missed a big opportunity to add Doom II content to the original Doom as well as providing new content for the 4th episode. Aside from the beta Lost Soul, I could see adding a miniature Cyberdemon enemy with weaker rockets, adding another enemy with splash damage projectiles. An enemy like that combined with the Doom II cast would have made a tough episode even tougher.
  9. I'm kind of retarded and forgot the max player limit was 4. I thought it was 8 on a LAN 4 over modem for some reason.
  10. Ah, that's cool, that makes them even more dangerous than I realized. This behavior actually would make them quite a threat when combined with actual hitscan monsters like the Zombies and projectile-spewers like Imps, since they could float around, "charge up" their attack so they don't spam it, then release it and hit you, kind of like an archvile in a way.
  11. I think the lack of a "Quick 180 Turn" was a small and forgivable oversight, something Duke Nukem 3D's design team noticed. I think they should have kept one of the rifles and gave it a slower firing rate than the pump-action shotgun and kept it as an E2 weapon with the PR and BFG. Essentially it could have been a more concentrated version of the shotgun in terms of power, but tactically it would have been useful for picking off Demons at a distance but not being too powerful to make Cacodmons and Barons irrelevant. The lack of a speed-boost power-up is odd considering how fast the Marine already moves, it would have been a good power-up for Doom II but I can see not having it in the original Doom. The pre-release Lost Soul's hitscan attack would have made for an interesting enemy, I think, a hitscan flyer that is tough enough to handle a few blasts but not too tough to be frustrating in groups. I think it would have made more sense for Doom II than the original, though I suppose they could have worked as an E3-only enemy. The lack of a 25% armor boost equivalent to the medikit puzzles me, you have a 1% bonus, 100% and 200%, nothing to give a small addition to your ratio without giving a full-on green or blue armor. They should have made the spectre effect a tag instead of its own thing, so they could have selectively used different types of spectre-fied monsters. Imagine being ambushed by a spectre Cacodemon in E2M1 for example, you'd know you'd have to keep an eye out for the visible versions and invisible versions. I would have only used demon spectres in the Shareware and never tagged the zombies so that spectre Imps, Cacos and Barons, etc. were a full-game surprise. The success of Deathmatch and Coop in Doom 1 should have lead id to add CTF to Ultimate Doom and Doom 2, IMO, but that isn't a huge deal, especially considering the open-source nature of Doom. Still would be nice to have Vanilla CTF, though.
  12. Yes, another irrelevancy. It is in fact not illegal to be a racist son of a bitch, it is illegal to systematically be one while performing public duties, sure, but the typical civilian is allowed leeway on the asshole scale. Let us say that theoretically George Zimmerman did in fact "racially profile" Trayvon Martin, you would still have to prove that the profiling lead to an intent to unlawfully harm or kill Martin. This is not as simple as proving he had racist views (the FBI investigated his backround and found that there was no evidence to support the idea he was a racist), you have to prove that the racist views were part of his INTENT TO KILL MARTIN UNLAWFULLY. Intent. At the moment of the incident. Almost impossible to prove unless the person gives video / written confessions stating such.
  13. Trayvon is dead, but that is typically what happens when lethal force is used in self-defense. Emergency / non-emergency operators cannot legally give you any order, either way, the operator said specifically "we don't need you to do that". This is not an order, it is a liability statement. It is entirely irrelevant to the situation. You could call up and say "I see a house fire and I hear a baby crying, get here quick, I'm gonna go rescue the baby" they will say "we don't need you to do that." If you actually do or not is up to you, but it's not an order, it's simply a way for them to absolve themselves personally and as whole (IE : their employers) of responsibility for the aftermath. At one point in the timeline, Trayvon and George were in close enough proximity to speak to eachother. At this point in time, neither party was doing anything illegal. What followed afterwards was laid out in a court of law, and a jury felt there was enough reasonable doubt. Also, invoking the law as your defense is not the same thing as the law being read in jury instructions. Regardless, I'd say that when you are pinned to the ground, which is corroborated by physical evidence and a prosecution eye-witness, you don't have the ability to retreat, thus the case would more or less play the same in a Duty to Retreat state.
  14. I'd like to point out that "Stand Your Ground" was NOT invoked at any point in this trial, this was "basic self-defense" which is pretty much established in centuries of common law (American common law is based on English common law), case law and legislation. Killing a person allegedly trying to kill you and claiming self-defense has not really changed much in several hundred years.
  15. darknation wins. Flawless victory. Fatality. Hopefully Mr. Jedi gets caught up in a sting set up by Chris Hansen, that'd be pretty epic. "Look man, I just wanna be friendzoned because I like the way she expresses herself." "That's why you're holding a bag full of condoms, vodka, lube and duct-tape?"