|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
This is why I have a basic rule for myself: "You mind your character sheet, and I'll mind mine."
To a point. if the game has a defined theme and someone is dead set on ruining that it gets old fast. A paladin in skull and shackles or a half fiend necromancer in carrion crown APs for instance
Yeah to me me V (v for vendetta) "order is bad" is a good example as is Riddick (pitch black, chronicles of riddick) "i just want to be free".
his story was that they threatened him when he told them to turn it down. If i gun had been found or something that looked close enough that they may have been bluffing he might have had a case. As it stands it is a lack of evidence and his story vs theirs so stand your ground is pretty much not a factor at all. First degree requires planning, this is an act of rage on the spot, second degree
I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
A killer and thief yeah he is scum of the lowest sort even if he gave some to others
Not so much discredit the democrat as discredit the notion that we should give up the second amendment and be disarmed. It is just that right now only democrats seem to be actively pursuing that. Again there is his background to think about. not racial, chicago. the home of failed gun control.
Sorry, i just don't like giving up when i think someone is dead wrong. Especially when they are dead wrong about policies that cause harm to people.
And my brother, cousin, newphew, etc? Their enslavement is meaningless?
Yes yes, for too long i have not bowed to your veiw so i must be playing games and so on. Actually say something and i will adress your point.
Wich would be relevant if the "minority revolutionaries" would have conquered the others and forced them instead of gaining support and becoming the majority. The fact remains that the revolution was based on a desire to rule themselves and be no man's subject
Now we are getting somewhere. True there is not one law on the books that treats any race better. However, racial discrimination cases and hate crime laws seem to be unevenly judged, i believe that to be an issue. Also affirmative action policies are typically ruled legal, even if they are giving undue "help" to people who do not need it while ignoring people who are disadvantaged that are not of the groups the policies are meant to help, whites and asians typically getting the short end of the stick
I don't tell you what you want to hear so you dismiss me, very adult.
Well lets see the boston tea party was the begining of a revolt to overturn the rule of a distant king to allow the local people to choose their own lives and have a representative government. Green peace is using at the very least psuedo terrorist tactics to tell other people around the world how THEY have to live to be aligned to the proper GP philosophy to avoid further problems. So yeah, we want to live free as we choose to VS you willl live how we tell you to are VERY different indeed
not at all. i want real equality, you cannot have that by saying that one deserves better than another. You really have not listened to a damn thing i have or are just so stuck on your race agenda that anyone that thinks different you simply dismiss. So lets have it then, a straight talk. WHAT are the INHERENT bonuses and penalties, particularly by law, that seperate the races? Put your money where your mouth is and actually defend what you stand for
And it is not a game, i want you to see that your veiw is wrong. it is not about winning a game, it is about changing a view that i can see as nothing but utterly racist
And sometimes those you call racist are just stating FACTS you do not like. i believe every race should be treated the same by the law, same for gender. Minorities are responsible for some, not all. neither are whites responsible for all unlike what you believe. not all of what you call discrimination is indeed discrimination at all. Whites are not oppressed by minorities, they are not given the same special consideration even if the come from an equally or more so disadvantaged background though. I see you as the racst in this. you are the one acting like minorities cannot achieve by merit and need to be given extra to succeed, and that whites deserve less to have more given to others. We have all heard of the evil HR guy say "its dark enough here already" but you can stand there smugly letting whites get screwed by the "equality" rules you love since "it's too light in here". ALL people deserve to play by the same rules, to be given the same chance and NONE deserve nor should expect equal outcome regardless of actions.
So you are not interested in talking about the actual facts of racial disrimination being created in the name of "equality". i see
Freehold DM wrote:
But that is just it, as long as the "victim" of discrimination is not white many jump to the conclusion WITHOUT looking att he rest of the reality
ok so the white guy with a shaved head says he was not hired by a jewish grocer for racism, the jewish grocer says "look at him, he is white with a shaved head that makes him a nazi". would you call the grocer racist? If the same grocer refused to hire a black kid because he "looked like a criminal" for his dress and hair style would you call him racist?
very true he was a "hero" only to those he helped. I see that as little different that southerners at one time seeing Klansmen as heroic, since they were on their side.
Ok what about being born black or white is inherently a bonus or penalty? Ok now what bonuses and penalties do we have rules to give?
the gun sales have everything to do with a liberal chicago politico making it into the whitehouse and little to nothing to do with race. The vast majority of legal gun owners are white males so yeah no surprise they are the ones to buy more before the laws can be changed. So that argument is just a stupid attack on those "evil racist gun owners" that you obviously are clueless about.
Sounds like you are a hard worker with actual work ethic, you are better than most workers
because thinking that no one should get bonuses or penalties for their race is racist.....Of course making the rules so that all the bonus goes to non whites and any penalty goes only to whites is not racist at all. yeah that is fair and never gonna cause any resentment.
of course it also depends on the reservation. of course they thmselves are very discriminatory, see what happens when i white guy goes onto a reservation and watch all hell break loose if he does anything wrong. Lots of badguys on both sides of those borders.
Well it doesn't get them points to be proud of being a "progressive" company to promote a hard working white person, and you will not (cannot?) sue if you do not get what you have decided you deserve. But you are white so how dare you assume that it might be discrimination. after all too many people your color have it too easy.
I think someone made great justification to destroy all forms of authority because they might use force against you if you break the law (even if being a murdering psycho was the original offense, how dare they threaten me). Hmm kill all in my way so i can do as i please. pretty sure that is the good old CE in a nutshell....
The 8th Dwarf wrote:
Not entirely true, fire is indeed part of the growth cycle here too. I have heard that some (pine species i believe) require fire to reproduce as well, as well as changing the dynamics of shade and sun to allow some species to grow.
All in all loggers MIGHT be more interested in healthier forests than many enviro types, much as most hunters care more for healthy game than animal rights wackos.
Or the reality that helping based on race is inherently racist. A government that would tell the child of a rich black family that went to private schools that he deserves a leg up and the poor asian or white from an uneducated immigrant family can get bent because his people have it "too good" is worse than one that does NOTHING about "inequality"
yeah but we once had a lawmaker trying to figure out how to tax a backyard garden, since those veggies are "income"
Freehold DM wrote:
You get pissed off dirtbags, you are not the one expected to subdue them. Slight difference. That said social workers are underpaid, many of them dealing with crap pay to deal with the dregs of humanity because they really honestly just want to help people. That is the most sad and pathetic part about trash threatening and hurting social workers, those might be the last people on earth that actually WANT to help.
With the daily threat of death, injury and disease i do not call that too much pay at all.
Ross Byers wrote:
Im all for treatment if they ask, but when it is because of doing something illegal do not pull any punches when they get caught red handed
That's why i think pretty much all drug users and heavy drinkers are just too damn stupid to assess what it is doing to them
A Man In Black wrote:
What part does it play? if you are doing illegal drugs you get treatment in jail, not told how sorry the world is for not being perfect and not punishing the law breaking. And double down on them if they CHOOSE to go back to using after treatment. Once might have been a bad choice, twice is a pattern and basicly proof they have no intention on stopping.
If there is a "protocol" difference you think there might be an actual reason for that? That maybe they ARE more likely to resist/ assault an officer.
Fair enough, i cannot say you are wrong there at all.
You kill of enough of them and people might rethink it as an option. you kill off enough pushers that it becomes hard to distribute. make it not worth the risk
Ross Byers wrote:
Yes, and not many alcoholics drink 4 a week. that is moderate maybe. now when you are doing 4 a day you know better.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
With legal substances it is hard to solve. with heroin and meth the answer i think is to crush the source. To hell with catching a buyer, hunt down and eliminate to producers and distributors.