Is this too far?

[Matthew]

http://www.wtnh.com/Global/story.asp?S=2360824


I know one of the kids that got arrested. He says he was talking about violent games like Doom 3 (in a pottery class) and the conversation went to how stupid some terrorists and killers are. He took Columbine for example, and how only 2 were killed. Basically he said if it was him and 3 other friends went nuts, that a lot more than 2 would be dead.

Well, some ultra liberal 17 year-old female overheard this and took offense. They interrogated him for 2 hours, and after school arrested him, holding him in jail until his mom could come and post bail. They charged him with disturbing the peace, and are possibly trying him as an adult.

[marksiwel]

Hey we all have thought of better ways to kill people, but most of us dont talk in public about it.

These kids had a big mouth, but getting the police involved was stupid.

Also the article said one of the kids had a 3.8 average...so what? I had a 3.2 and I havent been to jail! HA HA!

[Droogan_Leader]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
I havent been to jail!

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe not as mark.. /forums/images/icons/shocked.gif

[marksiwel]

that would explain the tat's on my back that say "Daddys little girl"

[Droogan_Leader]

It's a tough call, since they were in school. It isn't exactly like "free speech" means you can exercise your right to curse out the teacher or talk about whatever in class. Most teachers have something posted about you can't do this, etc.

Pressing charges is a little much though. Whatever happened to 3 days suspension, for Pete's sake?

[EternalStrife]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Hey we all have thought of better ways to kill people, but most of us dont talk in public about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's right. We usually just make a list.....

[Droogan_Leader]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
"Daddys little girl"

[/ QUOTE ]
Have you been a bad little girl?

[marksiwel]

thats it now YOUR on the list for talking about the list.

*adds name on list, puts on lip stick, cleans rifles*

[Droogan_Leader]

I was gonna try to find that picture of Buscemi, you fancy pants gangster!

[marksiwel]

I couldnt find a picture of him from Happy Gilmore but I did find one of Walken but I couldnt find one of him from McBain

http://www.joblo.com/movienews/images3/walken.jpg
And remember all quotes from Mcbain must be done in Red.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
<font color="red"> My eyes! The goggles, they do nothing!!"; </font color>

[/ QUOTE ]

[Droogan_Leader]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
My eyes! The goggles, they do nothing!!

[/ QUOTE ]
That McBain thread... you .. remembered!

The link doesn't work

[marksiwel]

Yeah I remember the McBain thread. Hell thats my fav. Thread ever. It just proved that people here are my kind of dorks.

[Jason_Brown]

<font color="red"> MENDOZAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!! </font color>

[DangerSeeker]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
some ultra liberal 17 year-old female

[/ QUOTE ] Where did you get this from? First off, it says a GROUP overheard them and turned them in. Second off, there is nothing ultra-liberal about silencing somebody for discussing something. Fuck, it's what we've been fighting against people like you for for Gawd knows how long. You simply tossed the term "ultra-liberal" in there to act as an insult, much like using the non-offensive term "gay" as an insult, thereby trying to make the word itself an insult by definition. That, or you were trying to associate this behavior with liberals just to sway people offended by this behavior away from being a liberal when the two have nothing to do with each other. Either way, dirty pool, old man.

As for the kids getting arrested for what they said, I'll again go on record and say if things like this can get you arrested, I should've been doing life since I was 6. We used to pretend to shoot up the whole neighborhood all the time. I've doodled mushroom clouds since I first picked up a pen. This sort of paranoia is absolutely going to far.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - All about the Benjamin (Franklin)

[Razorback]

Ultra-liberals are like Nazis, minus the Nazi stuff. /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

[karmattack]

I suppose it's better than the Neocons who actually kept the Nazi stuff. /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

[Razorback]

The funny thing about what you just said is that the term "neocon" was actually first used to describe the new Jewish republicans. Hilarious how you would use Nazis to describe them.

Oh wait... no it is not.

[karmattack]

The worst part about it is I don't see my choice to compare them as the unfunny and ironic part.

The major party identifier being aggressive foreign policy including foreceful military action to impliment American political ideals on other nations?

You're right. Not funny at all.

[karmattack]

This is silly fun, but here's a political ideology quiz. (http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=zeron)

My top 5:

1. Third Way

2. Liberal

3. Radical

4. Left-Libertarian

5. Centrist

[ZyronDrazil]

That's total bullshit. They were just having a casual conversation. Why is the government tryin to ruin our freedom of speech? They didn't even deliberately say they were going to do Anything. It was just a 'what if' statement.

Then again Stephen King did recieve a few threats in response to "The Dead Zone" for animal cruelty (when the mayor guy kicks the dog to death). An animal in the Story. That wasn't even Real. So I guess people are really that crazy..

Thats totally against the freedom of speech and everything we stand for. The kids who shot up Columbine were making bombs for months in their basement. They deliberately threatened the people they wanted dead.

That was just a casual conversation, I'm so glad I'm not in Highschool anymore. College you don't have to worry about that shit.

That sucks about your friend man.

Final Thought: Besides without games like Vice City and shit. People would be going even madder.

Violence/killing people has been around forever. At least in videogames the people being killed aren't real. Unlike in the Roman era's with the Colliseum and the battles to death. Nothings changed, but technology has made things better, because people get the blood thirst they want, without actually getting the blood.

[Dave]

Here's a newsflash for you people. Children do not have the same rights as adults. That's why there is no "Freedom of Speech" in Highschool. There are all kinds of things you cannot say or do at school. Evidentally this is one of them, i will echo the person who asked whatever happened to the "3 day suspention"? but really even that seems a little harsh for this. Couldn't the kids have been called to the office for a talk, to see what was up, first? In my town a girl was expelled for taking a Motrin for cramps, because it was "against school board drug policy". (She later sued and was re-enrolled.) It just seems like administrators don't want to take the time work things out on a case by case basis these days. No wonder our schools are in such bad shape.

About the Final Thought, that's bullshit, people were fine before games such as Vice City. I think a pretty good case could be made that these ultra violent games (and even the violence in other genre's of entertainment) have a dentrimental effect on the population at large.

[TomHarrington]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
About the Final Thought, that's bullshit, people were fine before games such as Vice City. I think a pretty good case could be made that these ultra violent games (and even the violence in other genre's of entertainment) have a dentrimental effect on the population at large.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is that a joke? People were fine before Grand Theft Auto hit the shelves? I think sociopathic behavior predates GTA.

[Dave]

That's very true, i'm not saying that GTA causes this behavour, or that Ozzy causes kids to kill themselves, or anything like that. I'm just saying a case could be made that the increasing amount of sex and violence in our society since the 1960's has had a negitive effect on our culture as a whole.

I'm not saying that i even really believe that, because honestly i haven't done any research on, I'm just saying a case could be made.

[Razorback]

It was Pacman... that little yellow munching maniac started the whole thing.

[Rico]

I just know that if I ever see a real ghost, I'll try to eat it.

[ZyronDrazil]

I have to agree with RB on this one.

That Mrs. Pacman screwed everything up even worse when she dumped him.

[TomHarrington]

I hear ya. Just checking.

[TomHarrington]

It wasn't Pac Man, it was George Lucas! He shot first! /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

[Razorback]

I heard it was that Tom Harrington. He couldn't come up with an original quip and that lead to all the crime.

[ZyronDrazil]

No.. Pong... Pong shot first.. if thats what you're getting at. Blame that Ball.

[TomHarrington]

Yeah, some of my stuff is so bad as to be criminal. Guilty as charged, RB.

Now stop being childish, ya boobie-head!

[ZyronDrazil]

Back to my pong reference.. Didn't Pong consume an entire generation?

[Matthew]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Where did you get this from?

[/ QUOTE ]

I said I know one of the guys. Ken Munson. That is how I know she is an ultra liberal. She is the one who made the big stink, and all her liberal lackeys followed.

Man, you sure took offense quick on that one without knowing all the facts.

..typical.

[Robbo_the_Hood]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
i'm not saying that GTA causes this behavour, or that Ozzy causes kids to kill themselves, or anything like that. I'm just saying a case could be made that the increasing amount of sex and violence in our society since the 1960's has had a negitive effect on our culture as a whole.


[/ QUOTE ] These industries are all after money. These things wouldn't increase if hours of market research and billions of dollars didn't prove that these types of things are exactly what would make them money.

The politicians can bitch about how they are going to bring family values to the airwaves, or how they are going to take those Hollywood heathens to task for the smut that they peddle, while in reality, they have no jurisdiction over the entertainment industry. Meanwhile, congress approved an FCC deregulation bill in 2003; they are taking restrictions away from they very industry they are railing against.

But if we have to blame video games, heavy metal, movies, etc. for corrupting our kids, we should also blame the shitty parents who completely ignore the clearly repeated warnings that some particular material is not suited for children. Some things are for kids and some things are for grown-ups.

The real issue is that no one is taking responsibility for their actions. Of course parents don't want to admit they did a poor job raising their kids, so they make believe that it was Judas Priest that pushed their children over the edge.

And while high-school sex, and experimenting with drugs and alcohol were okay in our day, because we knew what we were doing and we're well-adjusted, the children now are just complete morons that will shoot anything in sight.

So, could it be that it's the moneymaking culture of sex, violence, and drugs that is obviously what people want, else it wouldn't be in business; or is it that kids are over protected and super-structured so they don't have a chance to think for themselves and come to their own conclusions. Playing is now done by appointment in a structured environment where no imagination is tolerated. In our day, playing "War" in the neighborhood was not only honorable, but encouraged. We used our imaginations, and we knew the repercussions of what dying in war meant, any time we uttered the phrase, "You missed me! See the part in my hair?"

I am not lamenting a more innocent time, and that our generation was the last good one. It isn't music and drugs, or the Internet, but the problems lie in our culture of fear, and our lack of personal responsibility. Someone is out to get our kids, so we have to hover over them at all times. Should our children turn out maladjusted, it must be the fault of the media, or someone from school told them to do it. Not our shitty parenting.

[ZyronDrazil]

&lt;claps&gt;

[Droogan_Leader]

I agree, not because I approve of all the crap on tv, radio &amp; cet., but because I hate people telling me how to think or not think.

And it's always so much easier to point the finger at someone else.

Critic. It's your fault, the parents, for not being home to greet your children after school with milk and cookies, and make sure they are being good.

Parent. Well, if it wasn't for this [or that] president, we could make enough so the misses could be a stay-at-home mom.

Critic. Well, you make your priorities, and you spend your money on what matters most.

Parent. Well, you have your views, and I have mine.


I get tired of the run-around. Everybody in their right mind will concede that it all starts and ends in the home. Take responsibility there, and many problems will be solved from the source.

[Razorback]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
I agree, not because I approve of all the crap on tv, radio &amp; cet., but because I hate people telling me how to think or not think.

[/ QUOTE ]

Has the urge to quote every instance of Droog telling people how to think. /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

[Droogan_Leader]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Has the urge to quote every instance of Droog telling people how to think.

[/ QUOTE ]
Dirty pool, old man.. I like it! Would you, could you quote every instance?

[Robbo_the_Hood]

I'm not saying I approve of what is presented by the media, but if it didn't make money it wouldn't be there. If people didn't want porn, it wouldn't be the mult-billion dollar industry it is today.

And there is a reason that the world's oldest profession is still running strong. If people couldn't make money from thirteen-year-old Thailand girls selling their bodies, then the practice would not continue. It's basic economics.

Just because I don't blame Hollywood, that doesn't mean I endorse all of its products.

[Droogan_Leader]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
I'm not saying

[/ QUOTE ]
Right, again, I agree. I didn't mean to put words in your mouth--sorry if it came across that way.

[Robbo_the_Hood]

That's cool. But you should quit telling me how to think. /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

[ZyronDrazil]

&lt;still clapping&gt; damn this hurts after a while

[Droogan_Leader]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
But you should quit telling me how to think.

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you saying I'm trying to brainwash you all, so that when the political stage is set, I can trigger you somehow to kill the prime minister of Malaysia? Because if you are, you are really...wrong....



.....





.......






...........





http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/cassdvd/zoolander2.jpg

OBEY MY DOG!

[jjcourtright]

So many conflicting views in my head.

First, I was expelled from high school for having a weapon in my locker (stop me if you've heard this one). In a pre-Columbine world, the administration was searching my locker (for something that probably would have gotten me suspended, but that's another story) and found a nut (used for bolting down a light pole) about the diameter of a tennis ball. A friend of mine had tied a piece of cloth to it and wore it as a necklace for a day. Admit it, the idea of "big nuts" was pretty funny in high school. At the end of the day it got tossed into my locker and quickly forgotten about. Months later, it was found in my locker and both me and my locker partner were expelled. The oddest thing was that they claimed they found a "bludgeon" in our locker. I had always thought "bludgeon" was a verb, not a noun, but I was just some punk-ass kid who got expelled from high school, so who was I to judge their use of the English language? So with this background, I think it is completely outrageous, because I believe what happened to me was completely outrageous.

Second, can you imagine if these kids were planning on going on a rampage, and the administration had done nothing about it? They would have been crucified. In a post-Columbine world, I can see the administration's overreacting as just being reacting.

Third, while having my expulsion hearing, you better believe that I used my high G.P.A as a testament to my character. With the evidence weighted against me, I had to use every little thing that I could to try to tip the scales a little bit in my direction.

Fourth, Karma, here are mine:
1. Third Way
2. Liberal
3. Radical
4. Centrist
5. Neoconservative

Fifth, a question. It is my understanding that "neo-con" was originally a term to describe people who were socially liberal and fiscally conservative...a recent convert from the Democratic party that didn't get down with the idea of "taxing and spending". How is it that it now seems to be the term for the war-mongers in Bush's cabinet and people like them?

[karmattack]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
It is my understanding that "neo-con" was originally a term to describe people who were socially liberal and fiscally conservative...a recent convert from the Democratic party that didn't get down with the idea of "taxing and spending". How is it that it now seems to be the term for the war-mongers in Bush's cabinet and people like them?

[/ QUOTE ] Your understanding is right. It's just one of a few things "Neocon" is supposed to represent. If you read about it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism_%28United_States%29) in the Wikipedia, it says the term has been rendered mostly useless because of inconsistent use. I was using it to talk about the "new" conservatives who support war mongering and aggressive foreign policy -- no, not just the Iraq war.

Now, if you were to ask the Christian Science Monitor, being the bastion of sociopolitical mediocrity, it would say this. (http://www.csmonitor.com/specials/neocon/neocon101.html)

It all depends on who you're asking.

[jjcourtright]

So I should have used the term "empire builders" rather than "war-mongers"? My bad.

[DangerSeeker]

I would've used the term "Roller Coaster Tycoon"

1. Liberal
2. Radical
3. Third Way
4. Neoconservative
5. Left-libertarian

[Matt1]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
I'm just saying a case could be made.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't even think that's true. Politicians always harp about the damage media does to our kids, but I've never actually seen a scientific study that conclusively says that. Or for that matter, any study that says watching violent movies or playing violent game provides an outlet for violent tendencies. It is pretty much up in the air.

But even if it was proven that violent media caused violent behavior in X amount of people, would that really be grounds to justify banning it? Here's something interesting:
</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
An estimated 5,000 children ages 14 and under are hospitalized due to near-drownings each year; 15 percent die in the hospital and as many as 20 percent suffer severe, permanent neurological disability.
-Foundation for Aquatic Injury Prevention


[/ QUOTE ]
That seems to be a shocking statistic, one that could be used to possibly make a case for banning swimming pools. But take into consideration the millions of children who have swimming pools and never drown. Should their right to swim be taken away because of a relatively few unfortunate accidents? Should my right to violent entertainment be taken away due to a couple of kids with bad wiring?

We live in a free society. Not a zero risk society. As someone only slightly smarter than me once said...

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin

[FanGirl]

1. Third Way
2. Liberal
3. Radical
4. Centrist
5. Neoconservative

[Razorback]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Fifth, a question. It is my understanding that "neo-con" was originally a term to describe people who were socially liberal and fiscally conservative...a recent convert from the Democratic party that didn't get down with the idea of "taxing and spending". How is it that it now seems to be the term for the war-mongers in Bush's cabinet and people like them?

[/ QUOTE ]

It was actually first used to describe the Jewish voters, traditionally democrats, who had moved to the republican party. Later, as the small-minded realized that "neocon" sounds to idiots like "neonazi," it became a pejorative. Naturally, the mindless drones of the DNC use it all the time (like the numbnuts of the RNC use "liberal" as a pejorative).

[jjcourtright]

Just found this:

In its November issue, Esquire magazine poses the question all of Washington demands an answer to: Is Dick Cheney a neoconservative? "No," Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz tells the mag. "Cheney can't be a neocon. He isn't Jewish."

[Razorback]

That just proves, yet again, that I knows my shizznit.