Re: [GRIMDARK] Fallout Equestria: Project Horizons Discussion

[jacky2734]

Okay, how the whole gun rights discussion get started?

[Caoimhe]

Guns don't kill people, ponies do! Project Horizons!!!

[Guest]

Okay, how the whole gun rights discussion get started?

Admiral Rum asked about the American gun manufacturing industry, and it went onward from there.

@Caiomhe
Guns don't kill people, rocks do! The Dawn of Humanity!

[jacky2734]

@OAC
Oh, okay.

Also, guns don't kill people, plasma does! The Human-Covenant War!

[WavemasterRyx]

Thanks... I'm just not sure how much it helps for me to vent. I will try to shape up a little though. And I know it's not a crime, it's just my usual mood. And I'm supportive? Anyhow, can just hope to be done with most projects soon... just to enter the pre-post production... blah... ah well.

Well I hope you can find something that will help you feel better, ma'am. Just do what you need to, and remember we're here for you as much as we can be.
*gives you a gentle hug*

Public announcement because of the hilarity it may bring:

Ryx - you fuckin' complain about what I've just done, and I'll slap you before hugging you. Got it?

I won't complain... I... did start crying though, when I opened steam this morning and saw it. And I'm crying again now... Thank you so, so much, Kipper *hugs you tight*

[iLateralGX]

@OAC
Oh, okay.

Also, guns don't kill people, plasma does! The Human-Covenant War!

That's completely ridiculous.

Plasma kills shields, not people, silly!

[Katarn]

@Ryx
So, he send you ArmA2 too?

I don't care if Kipp say, that it was nothing, I HAVE to repay somehow for this to him....

[WavemasterRyx]

@Katarn
*nods* Yes he did. "Project Horizons DayZ Crusaders Yay!"? Heh.

And definitely going to try and repay him. I was already working on something for him, so I'll just doubletime that. *nods again*

[Ketchup]

@Ryx
So, he send you ArmA2 too?

I don't care if Kipp say, that it was nothing, I HAVE to repay somehow for this to him....

Steam sales are very awesome. I gifted Valikdu a copy of NV:UE, then bought another for myself when the price came down to 10. Project Nevada is a fun mod.

[Ketchup]

@Katarn
*nods* Yes he did. "Project Horizons DayZ Crusaders Yay!"? Heh.

I've got it too, actually. Haven't played it in a while, though.

[Katarn]

So...we have 2 of you, guys, I believe guard have copy of Day Z too, me and Kipp and two of my friends...though...time zones...

[Guest]

So...we have 2 of you, guys, I believe guard have copy of Day Z too, me and Kipp and two of my friends...though...time zones...

Yeah, I have a copy of it , just haven't gotten around to playing it yet.

[Guest]

@Katarn
"Project Horizons DayZ Crusaders Yay!"

That's it, I'm grabbing a copy. Not sure it can run on my normal machine, but I've got access to a hydrogeology beast that can more or less max out The Witcher 2 without a care in the world for a while, so yeah.

Between Steam sales and the one cent books at Barnes and Noble, I may have a problem. =P

[Katarn]

Just so you know. You will need this to play Day Z. Also, maybe, you'll need to run both Steam and this program with Admin rights.

[Scyto Harmony]

@Guns

I probably shouldn't contribute, considering I'm Canadian, but...

Speaking of Canadian-ism, the documentary Bowling for Columbine is great for this subject. Nails all the pros and cons of guns use.

Honestly, I think a person's opinion on the matter falls under their upbringing. It seems barbaric to let everyone have guns to me because that's sort of the general consensus here, while in the states, since most people own a gun, it seems normal.

[Caoimhe]

From what I recall that documentary plays haphazardly with information played as fact and uses selective editing bias to prove some of its point so it really isn't something that could be taken at face value.

[Vergil]

Funny story a completely different friend of mine gifted me ArmA the other day. Guess that's the in thing right now?

[iLateralGX]

The amount of people that bought ARMA II today is staggering. I knew I was not going to be the only one, but damn. There is like 15 people I know so far who have purchased it today.

The funniest part is they all bought it for the same reason. DayZ.

[Sindri]

It may not prove anything, but Australia does have much more strict regulations on firearms, they also have much lower death rates from firearms.

Don't compare Australia today with the US today, there are far too many variables. Compare Australia before and after they enacted strict gun controls.


And yes, it would be great if only responsible people were armed. How exactly do you propose to do that? Since there's no law which will give a gun to every responsible citizen and not give a gun to any idiot or criminal, the next best thing is to make getting a gun easy enough that any given, say, theater is likely to contain at least one responsible armed person. That way criminals will not be able to attack without fear of retaliation, and enlightened self-interest will keep them from hurting anyone else. Instead of the current system where guns are common enough that people who want to hurt people get them, but rare enough that those people feel safe using them because nobody else will.

And once again, if guns were gone altogether? It wouldn't mean there was no violence. It would mean that the violence would be done with knives and bludgeons, things that a hardened criminal can use easily and an honest citizen can neither wield nor withstand. You're giving all the power to people who like to fight and do it frequently and taking any chance away from those who have jobs that don't include beating people to death. Guns make people equal; without them the strong have power over the weak.

Not ever to be criminal is necessarily already one, that is a huge issue.

Never attacked somebody without provocation, sure. But how do you separate them from those who've fought in self defense? From those who were arrested whilst protesting an unjust law? From those who jaywalked or vandalized decades ago? There is no solid law that would always make the right decision. Which means you'd need an intelligent person making the decision every time, and that person would inevitably be corrupt...


At the end of the day, a well-armed society is a polite society. If a man knows there are a dozen guns around him on the street, he's not going to pull his own no matter how evil he is because he knows it would end with him dead, and he's probably not going to be too much of an asshole either. If that same man knows that nobody can defend themself, he's free to do whatever the hell he wants until the police arrive. Guns should be kept away from the suicidal, the terminally stupid, the drunk, and the distraught but I think that the world would be a safer place if armed was the default, and guns were taken away when somebody's likely to become dangerous (say, when they enter a bar) instead of everybody being assumed harmless until they start shooting.

That said, knives are easier for an unarmed, untrained person to counter than a gun is. I feel reasonably confident in my ability to disarm and/or escape from a person armed with a knife; the same is not true of a person armed with a gun. Furthermore, in a high-stress situation (such as a mugging), the chances of a knife being discharged accidentally are significantly lower, I expect, thus making the best defense against not being killed during a robbery (cooperating) that much more effective.

Have you ever actually been attacked with a knife? If you had, your confidence in your ability to defend yourself would probably be significantly lower. Try this easy simulation: put on a white suit, give a small child a red marker, tell them to try to mark you, and try to defend yourself. Except instead of a small child it's a career criminal who's double your mass and at least three times your strength. And instead of a red mark it's profusely bleeding.


And I'm not going to pretend my experience is typical, but I've been stabbed for cooperating completely, and talked down a man with a gun. Because when you carry a gun, you're constantly aware of it's lethality, the significance of pulling the trigger. When you use a knife, it's just a knife so what's the harm?

[Ketchup]

That said, knives are easier for an unarmed, untrained person to counter than a gun is. I feel reasonably confident in my ability to disarm and/or escape from a person armed with a knife; the same is not true of a person armed with a gun. Furthermore, in a high-stress situation (such as a mugging), the chances of a knife being discharged accidentally are significantly lower, I expect, thus making the best defense against not being killed during a robbery (cooperating) that much more effective.

Have you ever actually been attacked with a knife? If you had, your confidence in your ability to defend yourself would probably be significantly lower. Try this easy simulation: put on a white suit, give a small child a red marker, tell them to try to mark you, and try to defend yourself. Except instead of a small child it's a career criminal who's double your mass and at least three times your strength. And instead of a red mark it's profusely bleeding.


And I'm not going to pretend my experience is typical, but I've been stabbed for cooperating completely, and talked down a man with a gun. Because when you carry a gun, you're constantly aware of it's lethality, the significance of pulling the trigger. When you use a knife, it's just a knife so what's the harm?

I once read a book describing some missions special operations troops have done in the last century. In between chapters there were neat tidbits of training manuals, memoirs, etc.

In one of those, it mentioned that, when fighting an opponent who is armed with a knife whilst unarmed, you are to ignore the urge to protect your arms and use them to incapacitate the opponent's knife hand at any cost in injury to the limb. Doing this in practice, however, is likely very frightening and designed to be used with martial arts training.

[Scyto Harmony]

From what I recall that documentary plays haphazardly with information played as fact and uses selective editing bias to prove some of its point so it really isn't something that could be taken at face value.

Well, I'm clearly an idiot for not noticing.

At least it still bring sup some good points, right?

... Right?

Yeah, if anyone needs me, I'll be in the 'uninformed' corner.

[Caoimhe]

I just realized I spelled my own name wrong (of all things) when I registered here after failing to login a number of times on another computer. Is there a way to change it? :<

[Meleagridis]

I just realized I spelled my own name wrong (of all things) when I registered here. Is there a way to change it? :<

Just hit 'profile' at the top. Is it gonna be anglicized, now?

[Caoimhe]

That was easy! No, I love my parents for giving my brother and I nigh unpronounceable names to Americans.

I type over a 100 words a minute so I mixed the o and i. This happens more often than you'd think. :(

[Cptadder]

Ultra Mega I missed seven pages post go!

We're currently hoping to get the chapter out in... maybe twenty-six hours? Sorry about the delay...

Never given definite timeline, always speak in generalities least someone make a... countdown clock!
<div style="background:#000;width:350px; height:260px;font:0px sans-serif;text-align:left;"><object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" id="cdtw" width="350" height="240" style="outline:none"><param name="movie" value="http://cdn.countingdownto.com/c/w.swf" /><param name="flashvars" value="eid=106597" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#000000" /><embed name="cdtw" src="http://cdn.countingdownto.com/c/w.swf" flashvars="eid=106597" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="350" height="240" allowscriptaccess="always" bgcolor="#000000" style="outline:none"></embed></object><br/> <a href="http://countingdownto.com" style="font:bold 8px Arial;padding-left:19px;color:#444;">FREE COUNTDOWN WIDGET</a></div>

Jesus Christ. Ever have one of those days that's just a nonstop train of misery? You know, where you wake up late, forget you had a paper due, bomb a test, discover your car's power steering is about to give out, have a late shift at work, find out your old manager just fucking died, out of goddamn nowhere, have the new manager write you up for a "loss prevention strategy violation", get your lunch pushed back to six thirty, find out you have the early shift tomorrow, have your hours cut for next week, and oh yeah, break half the small bones in your fucking writing hand?

Yes, I've had those days but I've never manged to combine large personal injury with all that other level of crap. I always started my week of suck with a large personal issue like the week I got arrested for running a meth lab, the time I was almost expelled because I was accused of plotting to track down and beat up a teacher to force an abortion of her child, the time I got in deep with my command and got called up for a Captain's mast over something I damn well should have know better and saw coming for weeks. The weeks I spent doing nothing before everything went to shit because I spent weeks doing nothing instead of acting. The two days I nearly died and that's not counting the severe emotional trauma from my childhood, good times.

I never managed to get the super combo you seem to be racking up Quotidan, damn man, time to start thinking laterally about possible solutions which mostly seem to involve... necromancy of your old boss and a time machine for extra sleep time. That or patience... all of this will pass.

So... any pony know the size of the American arms industry and I mean in value like buy sell manufacture value. Billions or trillions I'm sure. Here's a thought if America banned civilian firearm ownership imagine the economic impact the job losses and businesses lost and the basic theft of everyone's property. The guns would be seized without recompense and well I have seen collections ranging in the six figures
Tell me how would it be a good idea?

There is roughly 88 guns for every 100 people in America as in we have two hundred and seventy million guns, assuming a simple 100$ a gun exchange (Which would be low balling it) to seize all guns would require twenty seven billion dollars? A ton of money but nothing we can't afford, except guns average closer to 500$ a gun not 100$ since lots of rifles are in the six hundred to a thousand dollar range and all assault rifles are pushing a thousand easy.

The second amendment reads - "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

The key word there being militia. This was created during a time when the United States was small and our standing army was not enough to defend ourselves. I believe once we had a standing army worthy of defense the need for a "militia" was just not there so the "right to keep and bear arms" should have gone as well.

Two things, one there are plenty of states where a firearm is still required to defend yourself when your out and about and not from people but these things we like to call Bears, yes you can live on the costs and walk around the woods perfectly safe but we are still a country with lots of woodlands close to civilization where a firearm is a good idea from a defense standpoint from Bears, mountain lions and other things that can kill you like male deer during mating season being more than happy to kill humans and the like.

Second during the time of the Constitution creation something most people forgets is that we had a universal (male) military. The 2nd amendment was written because at that time if you were an adult male you were in the militia. It's part of that old time language that does not translate well to today, you can read the papers and letters of the founders and the assumption was that a well armed society is required to protect the society form itself.

Even in a completely gun-free society, if such a thing is possible now, the criminals are given an advantage. Because without guns, all combat is done with more primitive weapons, requiring good physical condition and a great deal of skill. Condition and skill that is pretty much automatic to a life of crime, but not to the average peaceful life. Guns are terrible, but they are also the great equalizer. When they have a pistol in their hand, there is not much difference in capability between a hardened thug and a grandmother.

They are also serve as a great gender equalizer, something mace and stun guns also serve but if your a woman weighing in at a hundred and forty pounds you can not take a guy who's got half a foot of reach and a hundred pounds on you without an equalizer of some sort.

I find myself in total agreement with sindri.
I honestly wish more citizens concealed and carried and guns were allowed in more places... with the exception of bars, as you really don't want drunks with guns.
If this is at all in response to the batman movie shooting, most (maybe all) theaters have warnings at the front stating that firearms are not allowed inside. If one person in that theater other than the gunman had had a gun the whole ordeal could have been stopped so much quicker. Instead, he was about to be fairly confident that all he'd be facing was targets until the police showed up.

I disagree with you here, the shooter had planned this thing out well in advanced, everything from rigging his place to blow when the cops showed up (He had plans that the cops would show up at his place first to draw the cops away so he had more time in the theater but his plans fell apart when the stereo he had rigged to blast on maximum until the neighbors called the cops so they would break down his door shut itself off before the cops were called)

This guy had planning and forethought, part of which involved going in strapped, ready to fight and setting off enough tear gas and military smoke to give him excellent concealment, add in the large crowd, the layout of the movie theater and the chances of anyone taking him down were pretty low unless they were just as careless about shooting up the crowd as he was. Would such a thing be possible? Yes but unless there was at least three armed movie goes the chances of taking him down are just not great before he did as much damage as he managed to do.

It may not be a problem with the guns though, but the mentality of the people that use them, or regulations, I am not sure. However I think the United States is just too gun crazy.

There are countries where citizens don't have guns, almost at all, and the violent crime level is nearly zero (Switzerland)

Sections of our country are gun crazy, Switzerland is gun crazier than any part of the US (We don't all have assault rifles in our closets) but lots of that come from their universal milita. I found it a little odd Randomblank says Switzerland has no guns when they are number 3 in the world for per Capita gun ownership with 7.8 million citizens and 4.9 million guns minus the 400,000 official Swiss army issued assault rifles for militia members.

More over Randomblank look into Schützenfest's, these are held yearly all over Switzerland and elsewhere, it's the kind of place you can see little old ladies with G-3s walking by cops and waving as the Swiss police wave back and guns are everywhere. Mandatory and near universal gun training greatly helps the number of firearm accidents compared to the America method of "get training from a private 3rd party maybe"

Nobody's saying that gun control is the only factor, and it's difficult to determine the exact effect with so many variables. But when a country outlaws guns, keeps everything else the same, and violent crime rates double in a month, I call that correlation.

Exactly correlation is not causation but if you move a significant variable like legality of gun ownership you can see the effect. It's rather odd to see how bad the UK has gotten in the big brother department from banning firearm ownership to putting cameras on everything and they have not seen reduction in crime and the debate is it that the UK is just doing big brother badly (IE no one's watching the million cameras) or if they are just terrible at enforcement and collation of all the data gathered.

tl;dr Americans are violent, and it should be harder than being 21 and having an ID to buy a gun.

Actually in Indiana you can own a gun legally at 12 as long as you have a legal guardian sign for it and the only ID you need is for the Federal requirements, but then in Indiana you can own tanks and artillery pieces if you so desire. Indiana is semi-famous for not having gun ownership restrictions but instead gun ownership encouragements.

The fundamental idea of the US constitution arming the citizens is that once the government becomes criminally corrupt, the People can overthrow it in an armed uprising. That was the primary purpose of the right to bear arms.

Considering handguns available to the public are completely worthless against the modern Army, this tenet is already dead and gun regulation no longer makes sense in the constitutional context... unless you grant the people right to bear nukes.

Iraq, Egypt, Libya and possibly now Syria are all demonstrations of what an armed population can do, yes handgun are useless against tanks but you don't start a revolution by having massive tank battles in the streets. Revolutions are typically started with a city being slowly taken over. With time some of the military switches sides until you have tanks of your own. Simple conventional weapons are all you need to get that ball rolling. What you can't do is armed succession, that's impossible these days as that to clearly defines the battle lines meaning you get a hellfire missile up your backside before you can spit.

I had more to quote but then I'd not be using the countdown clock gag.

[CamoBadger]

Have you ever actually been attacked with a knife? If you had, your confidence in your ability to defend yourself would probably be significantly lower. Try this easy simulation: put on a white suit, give a small child a red marker, tell them to try to mark you, and try to defend yourself. Except instead of a small child it's a career criminal who's double your mass and at least three times your strength. And instead of a red mark it's profusely bleeding.


And I'm not going to pretend my experience is typical, but I've been stabbed for cooperating completely, and talked down a man with a gun. Because when you carry a gun, you're constantly aware of it's lethality, the significance of pulling the trigger. When you use a knife, it's just a knife so what's the harm?

This is true. People can talk all day about what they "would do", but until they're in the actual situation you never actually know what you'll do.
And personally, I find a knife more frightening than a gun. Someone who knows what they're doing can do much more damage to you with a knife if they're close enough (which if they pulled a knife on you they had better be close, otherwise they're stupid), and even if they don't know what they're doing, it's not hard to swing the pointy end at someone, plus vital areas are basically common knowledge nowadays.

Guns are a different story. As you said, people know exactly what they're holding when they pull a gun, and may not be ready to actually pull the trigger instead of just use the universal fear of the weapon to get their way. You can talk someone out of using it much easier, plus if they got it without learning to use it the possibility of a malfunction is much higher. That isn't to say you should assume they don't want to pull the trigger, some gun-toting criminals won't hesitate if you push them too far, and don't give a crap if you make them shoot. It changes from person to person.

[iLateralGX]

Never given definite timeline, always speak in generalities least someone make a... countdown clock!
<div style="background:#000;width:350px; height:260px;font:0px sans-serif;text-align:left;"><object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" id="cdtw" width="350" height="240" style="outline:none"><param name="movie" value="http://cdn.countingdownto.com/c/w.swf" /><param name="flashvars" value="eid=106597" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#000000" /><embed name="cdtw" src="http://cdn.countingdownto.com/c/w.swf" flashvars="eid=106597" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="350" height="240" allowscriptaccess="always" bgcolor="#000000" style="outline:none"></embed></object><br/> <a href="http://countingdownto.com" style="font:bold 8px Arial;padding-left:19px;color:#444;">FREE COUNTDOWN WIDGET</a></div>

Now I can look at this and be
a) Disappointed I missed being there when the update actually came out because I am staring at a clock
b) Frantically go searching for the chapter because I thought I missed something because the countdown reached zero and the chapter is not there.

Maybe secret option
Q) Update comes out exactly when clock ends, world hunger is solved, AIDS cured, world peace ensured and Valve finally able to count to 3 and Half Life 3 is released.

[O. Hinds]

I think that your clock is off by about two hours... Or I was really tired yesterday.

[jacky2734]

...(He had plans that the cops would show up at his place first to draw the cops away so he had more time in the theater but his plans fell apart when the stereo he had rigged to blast on maximum until the neighbors called the cops so they would break down his door shut itself off before the cops were called)

Sir, most of that is speculative knowledge, the Denver Police force has released no such statement. They are currently under a gag order as they investigate the shooting. They have not released the shooter's motives, plans, statements, or condition as of this time.

The only information which has been released are the names of the deceased, the number of injured, what the shooter was wearing, what weapons he had and how he obtained them and their appropriate ammunition, the suspect's identity, general description of the booby traps found in his apartment, and a rough timeline between when the first 911 call came in and when the suspect was apprehended.

All other information should be considered mere speculation and/or rumor until such time as it is confirmed or denied by the Denver Police department.

Please, do not spread the speculation and rumors and simply stick to the hard facts.

[Cptadder]

I'll admit Jacky that such knowledge is not confirmed by the Denver Police, however I'll say that it is a touch higher than pure speculation considering what they have released and what has leaked. We have his neighbors talking about the noise, we have the leaked information from deputies about what was found in the apartment and the fact the bomb squad was called in for defuse order.

A narrative can be constructed that takes the establish facts and builds a logical hypothesis from them but you are correct I not stating that the information I used was preliminary and not directly sourced to the PD.

OAN
I did not notice until now but I'm feeling good that my tribute managed to make it into ScytoHarmony's signature. I always feel good when something I've done gets into a sig line.

*Edit found the statement about the bombs

His apartment was rigged with jars of liquids, explosives and chemicals that were booby trapped to kill "whoever entered it," Aurora Police Chief Dan Oates said, noting it would have likely been one of his officers.

[Sponsored content]