| 179 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
GeezerGamer
Advanced Member
Joined: 4/03/12
Who ever said "Familiarity breeds contempt" didn't have an internet connection. |
4/06/12 1:39:05 PM#101
Originally posted by neobahamut20
If the conversation turned "Tit-for-Tat", and I've stopped posting, Consider it your win. |
|
4/06/12 1:40:35 PM#102
Originally posted by neobahamut20 That is pretty racist of you there neo... specially since last time I checked our national language was still english. You don't like Mexican Amercians? |
|
|
GeezerGamer
Advanced Member
Joined: 4/03/12
Who ever said "Familiarity breeds contempt" didn't have an internet connection. |
4/06/12 1:41:57 PM#103
I am betting this thread gets locked real soon If the conversation turned "Tit-for-Tat", and I've stopped posting, Consider it your win. |
|
4/06/12 1:42:09 PM#104
Originally posted by GeezerGamer This thread is entirely about ethics of gaming companies banning sex offenders from online games. Reading comprehension 101. |
|
|
4/06/12 1:42:30 PM#105
actually i wish they would do this everywhere my 10yo nephew just started playing this year. |
|
|
GeezerGamer
Advanced Member
Joined: 4/03/12
Who ever said "Familiarity breeds contempt" didn't have an internet connection. |
4/06/12 1:45:24 PM#106
Originally posted by neobahamut20 Shall we go back and quote your references to political parties and religions? If the conversation turned "Tit-for-Tat", and I've stopped posting, Consider it your win. |
|
4/06/12 1:45:55 PM#107
Originally posted by neonaka The word racism implies that there is more than 1 human race. Not wanted to deal with retards in official positions has nothing to do with ethnic hate. It simply aided in breaking down illusions set up by the people around me at that time. |
|
|
4/06/12 1:48:16 PM#108
Originally posted by GeezerGamer Go ahead, but keep them in context. They were entirely on topic, even though one was more of a reply to the usual childish mockery. You have been more off-topic than anyone else in this thread, FYI. |
|
|
4/06/12 1:52:18 PM#109
Originally posted by neobahamut20
noun
1.
2.
a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
Related forms
rac·ist, noun, adjective
an·ti·ra·cism, noun
_____________
hu·man (hy
![]() m n)
n.
1. A member of the genus Homo and especially of the species H. sapiens.
2. A person: the extraordinary humans who explored Antarctica.
adj.
1. Of, relating to, or characteristic of humans: the course of human events; the human race.
2. Having or showing those positive aspects of nature and character regarded as distinguishing humans from other animals: an act of human kindness.
3. Subject to or indicative of the weaknesses, imperfections, and fragility associated with humans: a mistake that shows he's only human; human frailty.
4. Having the form of a human.
5. Made up of humans: formed a human bridge across the ice.
_____________
Yeah I was pretty sure we were part of the Homo Sapien Species, not the Homo Sapien Race.
See we have many "races" inside of our "species".
All I want to really know is... Where do you get it, and how much of it you take a day?
|
|
|
4/06/12 1:53:22 PM#110
Originally posted by itgrowls No one really disagrees, the disagreement mostly revolves around how a sexual offender is defined. Like some said, having gay sex in some states makes you a sex offender, no matter the age. However, how about your nephews parents actually being parents and watching what goes on while online? Logging systems exist too, so why would you even trust the state to protect your nephew, are they better parents than his parents? |
|
|
4/06/12 1:54:52 PM#111
Originally posted by neobahamut20 ^ back to being sane again, This is actually a good point, I agree with this 100% |
|
|
4/06/12 1:56:17 PM#112
Awwww, man!?! I leave for a potty break and come back to this?
Can't we go back to pictures of Darkpony as a child? That fits the theme of this thread, doesn't it?
Wait! That was a different thread, and it kinda makes me look bad, doesn't it? I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil |
|
|
4/06/12 2:03:20 PM#113
Originally posted by GMan3 Take that scenario and make it two gay men having sex and yes, they would be registered as sex offenders. They also get their names smeared in the local news paper so they are likely to lose their jobs and any standing in the community they might have had. Lord knows, we gays already get automatically painted as pedophiles, despite the fact that the majority of pedophiles are indeed straight. |
|
|
4/06/12 2:03:22 PM#114
Originally posted by neonaka Are you claiming that you are 100% of 1 race, that never, in your ancestral history, none of your ascendants ever breeded with someone from another race? That is a bold and dilusioned statement to make. As soon as there is a mix, you no longer belong to that race, you are not a new race and are therefor considered part of the human race. I believe that it is simply not possible that it never happened. If you can provide proof, go ahead, but no one has delivered yet. Through my own reasearch, although I appear caucasian, I have 4.5% of me amerindian (without counting their ancestors), therefor, I am not really caucasian, since I am unpure. |
|
|
4/06/12 2:12:40 PM#115
Originally posted by GMan3 Actually, depending on what state he's in, that may not be false at all.
As others in this thread have already said, some states will classify you as a sex offender for all sorts of petty nonsense that has nothing to do with sex.
There was a case a couple years ago about a 17-18 year old who streaked at his high school graduation ceremony, (ran naked through the ceremony as a prank). Because there apparently were some young children at the ceremony, the streaking teen was potentially facing charges of exposing himself to minors. If convicted of that, he would then have to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life. I don't know what ended up happening but I remember it made the news because many people thought that was far too harsh.
|
|
|
4/06/12 3:04:25 PM#116
This touches on a larger problem in the US (and probably elsewhere) where the function of law and the criminal justice has gradualy moved away from being an instrument of justice and moved to be a technical enforcement system of an increasingly arbitrary set of rules and regulations. Combined with an ever increasing and restrictive body of legislation, you end up with a situation where virtualy every citizen could be technicaly considered a "criminal"....simply for running afoul of some arbitrary piece of code..if anyone caught them or bothered to enforce it. The origional conception (and execution) of the Justice system was brilliant. The criminal laws were relatively minimal and dealt mostly with truely serious offenses. Furthermore those who stood in jeopardy of conviction of serious convictions were provided with the ultimate defence of a trial by a jury of thier peers. This trial by Jury was conceived of as the final defence against tyranny and arbitrary justice. The Jury was empowered not just to judge the case based on the facts and the letter of the law but also upon the ideal of justice itself. If the Jury felt that law itself was unjust or the application of it was unjust in a particular case due to the circumstances of that case, they could vote to aquit the accused. Thus no matter what the Legislature, and Court might wish....if you couldn't find 12 honest and impartial citizens who would agree you did something wrong...you need not worry about facing conviction. This principle is called "Jury Nullification" and it was embraced as an important aspect of our origional justice system. While "Jury Nullification" is still technicaly allowed today....current Court practices have all but eliminated it. Judges are forced to instruct Jurors that they may only consider the plain and simple facts of the case and not issues of justice or whether the laws themselves are being justly applied to the case at hand given the circumstances.... and remove any Jurors who give any indication that they might be willing to consider anything other then a robotic application of the exact letter of the law (as opposed to the spirit of the laws intent or issues of justice). The Voire Dire process, further serves to eliminate any Jurors who might be inclined to critical thinking. Mandatory sentincing and lack of judicial leeway in application of the law further compounds the problem. On top of this, the system is so overloaded, that accused people sometimes must wait years for thier trials (sometimes while serving in prison, if they can't make bail...regardless of the fact they have yet to be convicted of anything) or under other serious imposition of thier rights and privilages as citizens. Sometimes people face longer punishments and impositions WAITING for a triel then they would had they simply plead guilty. The system is setup to process people as quickly as possible by getting them to Plea Bargain....rather then concern itself with determining true guilt or innocence.... and many people unfortunately take that Devil Bargain...not really understanding the full ramifications of pleading guilty to a technical offense. What we end up with a system that serves no one well. People guilty of relatively innocious or purely technical violations which really don't match up with the spirit of what a law is intended to achieve end up being lumped in with true predators and branded for life and subject to entirely arbitrary restrictions.... and the truely dangerous predators end up with a revolving door system of justice that allows them to continue to do harm to society...because not enough resources are availble to concentrate on them due to the system being swamped with more innoccous offenders who may be guilty of technical violations but are generaly harmless. We really need to start applying some common sense to our justice system....and not be afraid to let citizens and jurors to act as they origionaly were intended to act. Afterall...we are supposed to be a government OF THE PEOPLE...and the most important aspect of government is the administration of Justice.
|
|
|
4/06/12 3:20:04 PM#117
Originally posted by neobahamut20 offtopic but yes i read recent news about that party more surprising, lower down the list, the Pirate Party received 7.4% of the votes, outperforming the Greens. The original Pirate Party was formed in Sweden by Rickard Falkvinge, to fight censorship (especially online censorship) and seek copyright and patent reform. It evolved from the same organization that also developed The Pirate Bay file sharing website. EQNext press http://EQ3Wire.com EQ2: Freeport server |
|
|
4/06/12 4:07:08 PM#118
http://chartsbin.com/view/hxj Female http://chartsbin.com/view/03a Male
Link to Legal ages all over the world, put up the male one for the butt pirates out there. I know what your all thinking "You boys like Mex-i-co? Yee- Haww!."
|
|
|
4/06/12 7:35:52 PM#119
Originally posted by DarkPony What the fuck does a 21 year old see in a 17 year old, exactly? Sex offenders are exactly what they all are and this is a good move by New York. It should have been done before. ___________________ http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/12/13/ |
|
|
4/06/12 7:40:21 PM#120
Originally posted by brody71 Depends on the state what is considered statutory rape. In Michigan 17 is the age of sexual consent, other states its 18 some it is 16. Just depends on the state. |
|