Jump to content
LOTROCommunity

The MMO Troll

Members
  • Posts

    3,011
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    28

Everything posted by The MMO Troll

  1. There's lots to do at 60, because of the Planar Attunement system (which I doubt anyone could max out between 50 and 60). There is also dungeons, chronicles, PvP, dailies to max out notoriety with various factions, events, etc.
  2. I was in CB2, didn't get an invite to 3, but am invited to 4. Word is that CB4 might in fact be the last Closed Beta event, with Open Beta soon to follow.
  3. Yeah, I'd heard ANet was having issues with this yesterday, so this isn't really surprising. Often when one company gets hit, other companies fall victim to similar attack shortly thereafter.
  4. Well, there is Rifthead, and Junkies Nation has a section for Rift Guides.
  5. Came here to suggest this book. My mom read that to my siblings and I when we were kids, and it had first come out. It was one of the scariest books I've ever encountered.
  6. Actually, yes. Under Oregon law at least (I live there, so I'm most familiar with it), an armed person can use deadly force against an unarmed person, if the shooter believes the unarmed attacker presents a significant and immediate threat of death or great bodily harm to themselves or someone else. So if a big guy like Michael Brown were charging a police officer in Oregon, even if Brown were unarmed, the officer would be Justified in using lethal force to end the threat. It all comes down to what the shooter believes, you see. As you might expect, that's a wee bit controversial bit of the law. Florida has a similar take on lethal force, thus why George Zimmerman got off for shooting Trayvon Martin, as much of the case came down to if Zimmerman believed at the time of the shooting that Martin was an immediate threat (deadly or of great bodily injury) to himself or others.
  7. I've heard this is believed to be Zaire, but it could also be a new variant.
  8. I see the initial autopsy report has already been shared, but I'll drop my own link, for those who missed it, or wanted a different source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/preliminary-autopsy-shows-michael-brown-shot-six-times/ Throughout this thread I have taken the taken the tack that this shoot was unjustified, based upon what we knew at the time, being witness reports, since the police weren't saying anything. I was further cemented in that view when Ferguson PD tried to smear the victim, rather than release information which might exonerate their officer. I was wrong. The six shots that hit Michael Brown all came from the front. it is clear he wasn't fleeing at the time he was shot. He may have ran away some, but turned to face the officer again, or was backing up, but neither of those match the primary witness reports. Simply put, the facts don't support the witness reports, at all. Now, rather than saying he was fleeing with his hands up, the family's lawyer is saying Brown simply had his hands up, because one bullet struck his right palm. News Flash! Someone getting shot at raises their hands in an instinctive drive to defend themselves. Film at 11. The facts of the case even seem to support the recent claim that Brown did flee, then turned and charged back at the officer, as the final two shots struck him in or towards the top of the head, as though he had it down as one would in a charging stance. So, the facts do lean heavily towards this being a Justifiable Homicide, as things stand now. Again, I was wrong. I just wanted to come back to this thread to say that, because it needed to be said.
  9. 1) The Police have stated several times the police officer didn't know about the alleged robbery. 2) I've been licensed to do armed security, taken the same courses Oregon Police are required to take to carry a firearm on duty, and one of the things they drill into your head is that deadly force is only justified when the subject is a significant threat at that moment. This means, for example, an unarmed suspect that is using a human shield (such as a child), and threatening to harm or kill them. Running away with your hands up does not qualify. Read the case I linked regarding Tennessee vs. Garner, and you can see it mirrors this case fairly well. And the SCOTUS ruled the shooting was not legal. Furthermore, this is why the police mentioning they believed Brown to have been a suspect in that robbery is a means of smearing the victim. They admit the officer in the shooting knew nothing about it at the time of the confrontation, yet people won't think about that... All they will hear is "The kid was bad, and likely deserved it", and that's that. It is a means of coloring the jury before the officer even goes to trial, which if there is any Justice, he most certainly will. The shoot was unjustified.
  10. That ended in 1985 with the Supreme Court ruling Tennessee vs. Garner. Here is the relevent portion of the SCOTUS opinion, which I'm sure you know, applies to all states and supersedes their individual statutes. The truly relevent point, which I have stated several times thus far, is that "Such force may not be used unless it is necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others." A fleeing, unarmed suspect cannot pose a significant threat of death or serious bodily injury, and thus cannot have deadly force used to prevent their flight. This is the law of the land in the US, period.
  11. Again, he was unarmed and fleeing. Police are highly-trained professionals, and know that you don't shoot a fleeing subject that is not presenting an immediate threat to anyone, as was the case with Brown. What happened minutes, even seconds before do not matter, once he breaks from the confrontation and flees. Brown was no longer a threat, and thus shooting him was unjustified. The alleged robbery does not matter. The alleged fight with the officer does not matter. The only thing that matter here is "Was Michael Brown an immediate threat to anyone at the moment he was shot?", and the answer to that is "No." Both sides can spin it however they like, but the fact he was fleeing and unarmed are all that really matter to this case.
  12. Which is why I said earlier that I believe the officer will eventually be charged with Manslaughter. They'll say he acted rashly, and didn't really mean to kill Brown, and thus it wasn't Murder.
  13. Wrong. Under Missouri and US law, the shoot was unjustified. We know this already, because according to all accounts - including from the police - Michael Brown was unarmed and fleeing from the scene. He is no longer a deadly threat to anyone, and under Missouri and US law, the officer could not lawfully use deadly force upon him. Period. The FBI will conduct their investigation, and the local police will continue to try to smear the victim, mentioning an alleged crime he committed that the Chief admits has absolutely nothing to do with his getting shot, and in the end charges will likely be filed against the police officer involved. Because when all is said and done, whether he was assaulted or not, whether there was a robbery or not, even if Michael Brown attempted to grab the officer's gun while they struggled, once Brown broke away and fled the scene, and was not threatening anyone at that point, the officer could not legally shoot him. He could have tasered him. He could have chased him down and tackled him. He could have called for back-up, and established a perimeter, then the group of officers could have tracked him down. The officer had many options available to him, but instead he shot Brown. And the shooting was not justified.
  14. ... and after one day of peace, all hell breaks loose again! At least the peaceful protesters are trying to protect businesses from the few looters in their midst. Police are back in riot gear with armored vehicles. Looks like another fiery weekend in Missouri! This is the Twitter feed of an Alderman on the ground in Ferguson, trying to help keep the peace. Best info regarding the situation.
  15. I'VE GOT BALLS OF STEEL! B-B-B-B-B-BALLS OF STEEL! Love those videos!
  16. I have, but it was a blatant reference to a sexual act, or an RP server in "World of Warcraft". Sad thing was when I had to explain what a Dirty Sanchez was to the GM, so he would take the report seriously. The subject was immediately banned.
  17. Even if the robbery had been worse than it allegedly was, and the officer involved in the shooting was aware of it (which apparently he wasn't), he was still not justified in shooting Michael Brown. The victim was fleeing, no longer an immediate threat to the officer or anyone else, thus rendering the use of deadly force unjustified. This is simply an attempt by Ferguson Police to muddy the waters, and smear the victim's name, in an effort to clear the officer. I've worked in Security for 17 years, and I work closely with many former police and corrections officers on our staff. Every single one of them say the same thing: The law does not allow for police to shoot a fleeing subject that does not present an immediate threat to the officer or another person. Regardless of the crime they may or may not have committed, you cannot use deadly force to subdue a fleeing subject who is not a deadly threat. According to all reports, including those of the police, Michael Brown was not armed, and he was fleeing. This was an unjustified use of deadly force, and likely the officer will face Manslaughter charges, once all is said and done. Wait, why Manslaughter, rather than Murder? Because the State will not be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the Officer intended to cause Brown's death. It will be spun as a rash act, a mistake of judgment, that lead to the officer emptying his pistol into Michael's Brown, causing his death. They will cite the sheer overkill of shots fired as proof that he was not in a clear state of mind, blinded by anger and adrenaline, and state that thus Unintentional Manslaughter is the proper charge to lay. The Officer, whether he is found guilty or not in Criminal Court, will then face Federal charges, claiming he deprived Michael Brown of his civil rights. Those he will be found guilty of, and he will do some time (either in State prison or on the Federal level), and will never wear a badge again. The victim's family will win a massive lawsuit against Ferguson Police and the City of Ferguson, and after all is said and done, I expect the Chief of Police will be asked to resign. This will all take years to sort out, of course, and in the meantime, more institutional racism will occur throughout the US and elsewhere. More black, Hispanic and other people of color will die at the hands of Police and Corrections officers, and the cycle will roll on as it always has. It isn't right, it simply is.
  18. I'm really glad the County Sheriffs Department was pulled out (being the primary agitators), and the new guy in charge (from the State Police) has changed tactics completely. No more riot gear and military hardware, just officers in patrol cars and regular uniforms, talking with the protesters and listening to their concerns. Suddenly no more looting is going on, and the people are just marching and voicing their concerns peacefully. This is how you handle a potentially dangerous mass gathering. NYPD showed the same restraint yesterday, when there was a "Hands Up! Don't Shoot!" march in Times Square. What trouble-makers were in the crowd were detained and removed from the gathering quickly and professionally, then released after the march concluded. Police should make their presence known, in case there is trouble, but not antagonize the crowd, causing trouble to happen. Seems if you treat people like human beings, and not wild animals, they act like human beings. Who knew?
  19. Yeah, I still can't believe they dumped Rubicon.
  20. Very true. The NRA is more interested in maintaining weapons sales, and less about preserving the rights of Americans to keep and bear arms anymore. And what are called Militias today are basically Domestic Terrorists who haven't decided to strike. Yet.
  21. Good times. Looks like the police are confiscating the equipment, and will give most of it back, once the footage they shot - if any - is reviewed and destroyed.
  22. If Turbine stole my character's name like that, I would quit the game, and make a huge and very public protest about the change on the way out. You know, post every gaming forum, notify every podcast and blog I could find of the situation, offer to tell my story to any gaming media sites that were willing to cover the story, etc. Likely it wouldn't make a difference, but a gaming company stealing a player's established character name, then requiring them to pay for a name change, if they don't like what the company chose as their new name, would be a story worth telling.
  23. Looting and burning buildings isn't peaceful. That's the difference. That all said, the police clearly aren't helping the situation. Confronting the protesters in riot gear, shooting tear gas into crowds, and otherwise acting like dicks is just causing the situation to get worse, not better. What Governor Jay Nixon should do is send in National Guard troops to protect local businesses and homes, while leaving the protesters completely alone (unless they start trying to loot or burn things). Those who want to roam the streets and protest the police actions in a peaceful manner should be allowed to do so. In fact, Jay Nixon should be on the streets, joining the peaceful. protesters in decrying the shooting on Saturday. But that isn't going to happen. Ferguson will remain under the iron fist of local police, further building tensions and leading to greater protests there and elsewhere as the days go by. I would be surprised if there aren't protests in St. Louis itself, then other major metropolitan areas across the nation, soon.
  24. Yes, but keep in mind that civilians in the US do form up their own militias. These are scary people, often White Supremacists, who you'd really not want to meet in a dark alley let alone want owning firearms, but they are technically a militia. I know some of these folks, used to work with one, and yeah... I really don't like to think about what the implications of that part of the 2nd Amendment have wrought. That all said, I am a gun owner myself, and generally a proponent of the 2nd Amendment. But I also recognize that it clearly has been abused by Gun Freaks and misinterpretations of it have led to the NRA blocking common sense regulation of firearms to a large degree. My owning a couple of pistols for home protection is one thing. Owning an arsenal of weapons designed for military applications, such as the AR-15 (the civilian, semi-automatic version of the M-16) is something else entirely.
  25. China is actually more than five times the US population (2 billion, as opposed to over 300 million), while the US outnumbers China for overall prison population. The vast majority of our prisoners are also poor and minorities, mostly black.
×
×
  • Create New...