Hatred: The Game From God

[Phoenixwarrior141]

Storytelling music is amazing.

[Korban3]

That's fair, I don't think society at large will get that liberal in the foreseeable future unfortunately.

Liberals here are going the other way. Bigger government, less freedoms. I'm not liberal, I'm a constitutionalist. I've met a lot of people who don't think more freedom is better and that everything belongs to the state. I promptly encouraged them to piss off.

[Ragdollmaster]

Do you live in the US? We don't really have any liberals, everything is insanely balls to the right. Current democrats are right wing by global standards, republicans are radically right wing, and the Tea Party... I'm not sure many people even believed it was a real thing.

Anyways. I strongly support personal freedoms and liberties. Religion, marriage, gun rights, go nuts. The government needs to be big enough to take care of its constituents and no bigger. This includes in indirect ways, like limited regulation of business to prevent monopolies that ultimately hurt the consumer, and other sorts of regulatory agencies like the EPA. I think our current system could work fine, if the residents weren't all idiots, and if we were investing in infrastructure, education, and healthcare instead of military spending- alas, that seems unlikely to change any time soon.

While they're not ideal by any means and I despise the fact that we have an effective two party system, for now, I vote democrat because 99 times out of 100 it's better than the alternative. Really shitty that voting criteria is often decided by what the lesser of two evils is.

[renamedperson]

This game is sooooo evil. You just kill innocent people! In overgrowth there is bunnies, but in halo there are aliens. This is killing innocent people! EVIL

[Endoperez]

It's not about it being an evil action, but about it feeling like you the player were doing something evil.

Having fun that looks like shooting, e.g. CoD, is one thing. Shooting so that it looks and feels like hurting people, and enjoying it, feels wrong in a v. different way.

[renamedperson]

It's not about it being an evil action, but about it feeling like you the player were doing something evil.

Having fun that looks like shooting, e.g. CoD, is one thing. Shooting so that it looks and feels like hurting people, and enjoying it, feels wrong in a v. different way.

Amen. I guess when I play COD it is fun, but when I see how it is presented in this game, it appears horrific. (To me at least)

[Phoenixwarrior141]

That makes you a hypocrite.

[Korban3]

Do you live in the US? We don't really have any liberals, everything is insanely balls to the right. Current democrats are right wing by global standards, republicans are radically right wing, and the Tea Party... I'm not sure many people even believed it was a real thing.

Anyways. I strongly support personal freedoms and liberties. Religion, marriage, gun rights, go nuts. The government needs to be big enough to take care of its constituents and no bigger. This includes in indirect ways, like limited regulation of business to prevent monopolies that ultimately hurt the consumer, and other sorts of regulatory agencies like the EPA. I think our current system could work fine, if the residents weren't all idiots, and if we were investing in infrastructure, education, and healthcare instead of military spending- alas, that seems unlikely to change any time soon.

While they're not ideal by any means and I despise the fact that we have an effective two party system, for now, I vote democrat because 99 times out of 100 it's better than the alternative. Really shitty that voting criteria is often decided by what the lesser of two evils is.

Voting democrat tends to strip rights, ala Washington State's recent legislation.

Based on what you said, you oughta vote libertarian. Libertarians are the true political center, and a major facet is that the government be only big enough to defend our rights as the founding fathers laid out, and no bigger. Fascists are the far right, libertarians and free men are the center and republicans, democrats and socialists are the far left.

[Ragdollmaster]

Voting democrat tends to strip rights, ala Washington State's recent legislation.

Haven't kept up with that, what exactly happened?

Mm, but I'm not libertarian, I'm more of a moderate socialist. I'm all for taxing the super rich and using that money for the greater good. While I don't want a bloated and corrupt government, I don't want a barely functioning barebones one supported by minimal taxation either. I like personal social rights and liberties, but I believe (based on economic study and the current state of various nations' economies) that a government with enough money to not only protect its constituents but also invest in infrastructure, healthcare, education, and general technological development (not just faster, more accurate missiles... looking at you, DARPA) ultimately benefits the average person more than letting everyone do their own thing with minimum contribution to the state.

Or in other words, at the end of the day, I do believe in personal prosperity, I just think the most efficient way to achieve it is cooperative contribution. Humanity's strength lies in societies, numbers, cooperation. I don't think leaving everything up to privately owned and run-for-profit corporations that can ultimately control all of their products and services in a way that hurts the people, nor do I believe that free market capitalism with a Laissez-faire government is the end-all-be-all of economics. Yes, you need wiggle room to allow better products and services to be rewarded, to incentivize innovation, so I'm not talking full-blown communism here, but there has to be a middle ground, and America hasn't found it.

Of course the ideal situation of any political system is nice, that's why it's an ideal. In America we're unfortunate enough to have a haphazard semblance of left and right economics, both a bloated and inefficient government (the worst of leftist economics) and effective corporate monopolies that can make outrageous profits on consumers who have no other choice (the worst of rightist economics)

[Korban3]

Wealthy millionaires pushed lying advertisements that got a bill voted in that makes it illegal to transfer a firearm without a background check.

Recently, about a thousand of us went to the capitol and paraded around with rifles n stuff and burned our concealed carry permits and started a black market. Because fuck fascism.

[Ragdollmaster]

Background checks on who, the new or original owner? Because they run background checks when you buy a gun from a retailer. I don't see why that's any different. In both cases the intent is to ensure that people with no violent histories, like felons or the mentally unstable, have easy access to firearms. I don't have a problem with that. Limited regulation is better than no regulation at all, and it's certainly better than full restrictions (the US is sort of unique in this case... many countries with highly restrictive firearm laws like the Nordics and Japan have very very low rates of violent crime and accidental death, but there are too many confounding factors to delineate, like education, ethnic makeup, etc)

[renamedperson]

That makes you a hypocrite.

No. Being a hypocrite is telling people to do one thing, but you do the opposite. I said that the way it is portrayed in 'Hatred', killing innocents seems more evil than in COD. <-- Not hypocrisy! I am not telling people not to play killing games, and playing them myself. <-- Hypocrisy!

[Korban3]

Background checks on who, the new or original owner? Because they run background checks when you buy a gun from a retailer. I don't see why that's any different. In both cases the intent is to ensure that people with no violent histories, like felons or the mentally unstable, have easy access to firearms. I don't have a problem with that. Limited regulation is better than no regulation at all, and it's certainly better than full restrictions (the US is sort of unique in this case... many countries with highly restrictive firearm laws like the Nordics and Japan have very very low rates of violent crime and accidental death, but there are too many confounding factors to delineate, like education, ethnic makeup, etc)

It's background checks for both parties of any transfer, and it's bullshit. There's an amendment barring this sort of shit, and we're done. There's a lot of us here who are done with this waffling around bullshit that's been going on for decades, losing our rights at every turn. And now, with the UN trying to shove their disarmament shit down our throats, it's becoming obvious what the plan is.

The only reason Japan has a low murder rate is because they have a policeman almost literally in every living room in Japan, which I would previously have said wouldn't fly in the US. But, good ole misinformation and lies are taking us to a dark place.

We can also look at Switzerland, which forces all men to enter military service and requires them to keep their "evil assault rifle" at home, ready to use. Never invaded. Never conquered. Peaceful.

[Endoperez]

The world changing necessitates new laws. Has the world changed in such a way that easy access to big guns is now worse than it was before?

[Ragdollmaster]

So you think anyone, no matter their past crimes or mental state, should be able to own firearms? Hm.

Men are born free. What they do with that freedom is up to them. I think you can lose your right to bear arms if you show that you can't behave in a safe and responsible manner. I don't see it as some inherent right that you can never ever lose under any circumstance. In the same way that I don't want a sex offender living near a school, I don't want a convicted gangbanger carrying heat.

Switzerland, like the Nordics, is very homogeneous and is also economically prosperous with low class disparage and high education. Those factors, more than any proliferate gun allowance, is what lends them a low crime rate.