PCEngineFans.com - The PC Engine and TurboGrafx-16 Community Forum
Non-NEC Console Related Discussion => Chit-Chat => Topic started by: TR0N on January 31, 2008, 09:13:43 PM
-
I herd about this on a podcast and i must say it's rather sad.
http://blog.wired.com/games/2008/01/man-convicted-o.html#more
-
That is sad. Was the guy's XBOX still under warranty or is it just completely f*cked now?
-
:( That sucks.
People suck.
-
This guy will get his in prison.
-
I remember this story from a long time ago when he was first arrested. I hope someone in prison shows him how fun the game "drop the soap" can be. :shock:
-
I'm the compassionate type. I just hope he realizes that he did wrong and is sorry for it. I don't really want anything to happen to him, that wouldn't solve anything.
-
wow, that dudes a nut. I hope they lock him up for life!
-
I'm with Turbo-D
-
Well, he should go to prison. But, I don't really think other prisoners beating him up and things would change a thing.
-
Well, he should go to prison. But, I don't really think other prisoners beating him up and things would change a thing.
It doesn't change a thing, but even the most hardened of criminals in prison have a "code of honor" that says to never harm a child. Anyone who is in prison for harming a child has a short lifespan, unless Big Bubba finds that they make a pretty good bitch...then they might live a little longer. Might.
-
What a worthless piece of shit. I'm surprised the article doesn't say that he was playing GTA, Manhunt, or some other violent game and then try to blame the game for this scum bag's actions.
Was the guy's XBOX still under warranty or is it just completely f*cked now?
Warranties don't cover physical damage, so he's out of luck anyway.
-
That is pretty f*cking awful. :(
-
Warranties don't cover physical damage, so he's out of luck anyway.
That's f*cked up. Well, at least we can rest assured that while this dude may get 47 years, his no-good XBOX destroying daughter got the death penalty. :lol:
-
Disgusting.
-
That's why poor people shouldn't be allowed to breed.
-
That's why poor people shouldn't be allowed to breed.
Don't limit it to just poor people, as many other gene pools are just as shallow and over chlorinated. We have to have a license to drive, own a weapon, fish, hunt, and get married; so why not require one for procreation?
-
That's why poor people shouldn't be allowed to breed.
Where does Britney Spears come into your theory? :P
-
Warranties don't cover physical damage, so he's out of luck anyway.
That's f*cked up. Well, at least we can rest assured that while this dude may get 47 years, his no-good XBOX destroying daughter got the death penalty. :lol:
The xbox wasn't destroyed, it wasn't even damaged. He killed her because she interrupted his game, not destroyed his xbox. I read an article a little while ago which made this a lot more clear.
The xbox lives.
-
A related article said the girl had a two weeks old broken arm that the genius social workers hadn't noticed when investigating abuse claims. Absolutely pathetic.
-
That's why poor people shouldn't be allowed to breed.
Don't limit it to just poor people, as many other gene pools are just as shallow and over chlorinated. We have to have a license to drive, own a weapon, fish, hunt, and get married; so why not require one for procreation?
Parenthood! Great movie, that point stuck with me too all these years, it's pretty f*cking disgusting to me that people are just allowed to breed no matter what. I'm for vasectomies for men who don't pay child support, limiting family sizes for low income families, and castration of serious sex offenders such as child molesters. Its a harsh truth that pansies don't want to face, but this world is so f*cked up now that drastic measures have to be taken, and step one should be limiting poor people's ability to breed since the alternative of taking them off government assistance and letting children die is not acceptable.
-
Because, you know, someone's income is the sole arbiter of their value as a human being.
-
Because, you know, someone's income is the sole arbiter of their value as a human being.
You have hit on one of the most universal truths in human society! Sadly this is largely true.
-
Because, you know, someone's income is the sole arbiter of their value as a human being.
Jesus dude, the point is that PEOPLE WHO CANNOT AFFORD TO RAISE THE KIDS THEY HAVE SHOULD NOT HAVE MORE KIDS, and there needs to be government regulations to enforce it. Your's is the typical knee-jerk reaction, but if you think about it, why would you want poor people to be able to keep having kids? So their kids can be raised in poverty, be malnourished, be in and out of the legal system, leech off the government their whole lives, etc? There's such a huge taboo about messing with people's right to procreate, but with the earth's population growing exponentially the humane thing to do is actually prevent people from over-populating so that the people who are born can have better lives. Poor and un-educated people will not do this of their own free will, so the governments of the world need to do it for them.
-
Because, you know, someone's income is the sole arbiter of their value as a human being.
Jesus dude, the point is that PEOPLE WHO CANNOT AFFORD TO RAISE THE KIDS THEY HAVE SHOULD NOT HAVE MORE KIDS, and there needs to be government regulations to enforce it. Your's is the typical knee-jerk reaction, but if you think about it, why would you want poor people to be able to keep having kids? So their kids can be raised in poverty, be malnourished, be in and out of the legal system, leech off the government their whole lives, etc? There's such a huge taboo about messing with people's right to procreate, but with the earth's population growing exponentially the humane thing to do is actually prevent people from over-populating so that the people who are born can have better lives. Poor and un-educated people will not do this of their own free will, so the governments of the world need to do it for them.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/12/EnthanasiePropaganda.jpg)
-
The xbox lives.
So why is this news? ¯\(º_o)/¯
-
hey GUTS that's a sweet Freddy avatar. I noticed that the other day. Nice
-
Jesus dude, the point is that PEOPLE WHO CANNOT AFFORD TO RAISE THE KIDS THEY HAVE SHOULD NOT HAVE MORE KIDS, and there needs to be government regulations to enforce it. Your's is the typical knee-jerk reaction, but if you think about it, why would you want poor people to be able to keep having kids? So their kids can be raised in poverty, be malnourished, be in and out of the legal system, leech off the government their whole lives, etc? There's such a huge taboo about messing with people's right to procreate, but with the earth's population growing exponentially the humane thing to do is actually prevent people from over-populating so that the people who are born can have better lives. Poor and un-educated people will not do this of their own free will, so the governments of the world need to do it for them.
I agree with all of this, except the part about government regulation. China has government regulations, but it's produced mass infanticide as a side-effect. It SHOULD be common sense, but there seems to be nothing common about that
In Vermont, Howard Dean had signed a law stating that anyone who was on public benefits could never receive more benefits due to the addition of another child. It's just plain common sense that if you can't afford the children you have, how the f*ck can you support more? You can't, and the government shouldn't have to support your broke ass when you attempt to burden the social systems even further. Of course, everyone got all up in his face about this, stating that it was "unfair to women" (in Vermont, you can pull out the "unfair to women" card out as much as you like and have 2387456823476 special interest groups gloss and kiss your ass, despite the fact that women in Vermont have far more rights and "special help" programs than men).
It's always been my opinion that having more than two children was socially irresponsible. When a couple has one child, they are helping to reduce the human overpopulation problem. When they have two, the figure doesn't change at all. But three or more and they're contributing to the problem of human overpopulation, and when they can't afford that huge pack of rugrats they're spawning (because they're too poor for cable TV, I guess), it places more and more of a burden on society. "But I have the right to have children!" Yeah, and you also have the right to USE YOUR f*ckING BRAIN but it seems you ignore that one.
-
I can't tell if guyjin is just incredibly dense or joking around. Please be joking.
-
It's always been my opinion that having more than two children was socially irresponsible. When a couple has one child, they are helping to reduce the human overpopulation problem. When they have two, the figure doesn't change at all. But three or more and they're contributing to the problem of human overpopulation, and when they can't afford that huge pack of rugrats they're spawning (because they're too poor for cable TV, I guess), it places more and more of a burden on society. "But I have the right to have children!" Yeah, and you also have the right to USE YOUR f*ckING BRAIN but it seems you ignore that one.
What about a couple that had fives sons, like my folks?
-
No offense to your folks, but I don't see the need for any couple to have more than 1 or 2 children, at most. As a matter of fact most couples probably shouldn't have any kids at all. The state of the world's current population is a big issue whether people want to acknowledge it or not. Population is increasing exponentially and before too long we're going to face a real overpopulation problem if something isn't done. I'm not going to pretend to have a cut and dry solution but people need to really think before they start popping out babies like rabbits.
-
I agree. People need to have FAR fewer kids. Personally I hate kids with a passion and will therefore never have any. My time and money is for me. If a couple has 5 kids, then what happens when those 5 kids have 5 kids each of their own? And then those kids also have 5 kids each? That's potentially 155 kids in just 3 generations that all started from one couple who just couldn't use birth control or at least pull out in time. Now when you realize how couples all over the world have this same retarded mentality, you'll soon realize how overpopulated the planet already is. Sorry, but this planet does not have the resources to support this kind of stupidity.
-
Personally I hate kids with a passion and will therefore never have any. My time and money is for me.
FINALLY, SOMEBODY WHO UNDERSTANDS!!!! :dance: :dance: :dance:
-
What about a couple that had fives sons, like my folks?
Times were different when our parents were having children. The human overpopulation problem is now out of hand in most places of the world, especially in places like the USA. So what I say applies to the present time, not the previous generations. China was the only country to use a preemptive strike against overpopulation, although it's resulted in, as I stated before, mass infanticide. India has a similar problem; there is a very high abortion rate because everyone wants a son, so daughters are aborted (since their culture is so 16th century).
If people want to have a buttload of kids, they should move to Germany or New Zealand; countries with zero growth rate.
-
Sadly most of my acquaintances (I don't want to say friends- I have more in common with some of you fine folk) that are popping out babies are doing it thinking it's a magic solution to their problems. Relationship woes? Let's have a kid. Not getting enough attention? Let's have a kid. Drunk and puking acting like I'm still sixteen every weekend? Let's have a kid. Some people rarely think these things through. Being poor and having a kid's a problem sure, but not a problem like being stupid and having a kid. if you don't have the mind and balance to correctly care for yourself and someone else then how can you expect to care for a kid? Being poor won't make you beat on your kids- being an animal will.
I myself am scared shitless to bring a new person into this bullshit world. It'd be one more person to worry about. I have to worry about my girlfriend eventually driving a car in Howard Beach, Queens- a neighborhood where imbecile guidos go speeding around corners and flipping their cars over. I have to worry about a big portion of New York eventually being under water due to global warming. I have to worry that the spot on my arm or wherever isn't a developing cancer. I don't need to add to the list the million things that can go seriously wrong when trying to raise a child- let alone the state of social security, where this country is headed, knowing that when this kid grows up he/she would be lucky to afford a roof over his/her head.
I'm more for adopting children. Instead of bringing a new soul into an overpopulated, plagued world- it'd be better to help out with who's already here and whose situations could only improve by our intervention.
-
Shit, this is weird. Usually people don't agree with my views, but some of you guys hit the nail on the f*cking head :) :clap: :clap:
I'll come back to this later, I gotta do the dishes lol Yeah I'm so rock n roll. Anyway, I'm dead set against having children. I like kids, well..nice ones :) But, there is no way in hell I would bring a child into this f*cked up world. Aside from that, the over population problem. Adoption is GREAT, more people should do that. Its way more special than bringing a new life into this world.
Edit-Seriously, some of the words that you guys used, could have popped out of my mouth. I love this place! :mrgreen:
-
I'm all for adoption as well. There are plenty of people in this world that can't have kids (some of us argue that nature is a cruel dictator like this) and would love them, and there there are plenty of people who are irresponsible dumbf*cks who can't care for a cat, let alone a child. These irresponsible dumbf*cks should give their kids up for adoption for those who want kids but can't have them. But then, that introduces a whole new level of social problems...most people who wish to adopt only want perfectly healthy white babies and would never dream of adopting a child who was black, disabled, or over the age of six months. So the problems exist on both sides.
-
1984 and Hardware. You all go watch both and report back to me asap :P
-
If I was going to adopt, I could give a f*ck about the child's gender or skin color. The age thing is tricky, though, if you adopt older than a certain age there is an increased chance that kid is going to have some serious mental/behavioral issues later in life. I knew a few kids growing up that were adopted in the US between the ages of 5 and 7 years old (mostly of Asian descent) that turned out to be real nasty people. One guy in particular, was always in and out of jail, started selling drugs when we were in like 7th grade and continued on out of high school. I heard a rumor through the grapevine some time back that he ended up killing a guy over some stupid shit, although no one was able to pin it on him. One of my good friends was this kid's next door neighbor growing up, they were best friends before the other guy went bad. Anyway, this buddy of mine works as a paralegal for a law firm here in downtown Seattle. He takes the bus to and from work but the nearest hub is a nice walk away from his building. He told me recently on his way to the bus after work one day he passed by some vagrant sitting on the ground with a sign, and a cup, you know the drill. He did a double take at this dude and told me that it was that guy we grew up with, there was zero doubt in his mind. He lived next door to the dude for 10 years and hung out with him almost every day for a lot of that time period-- he said there was no way he'd forget the guy's face. He didn't say anything to him since no one we know has talked to him in years, but my friend said he looked really bad, was missing all his teeth, etc. The other kids I knew that were adopted old like that didn't end up quite so bad but most turned out fairly shady. Based on these personal experiences alone, if I were to adopt, I'd probably go as young as possible. Beyond that, any other traits mean nothing to me.