Straggler

Ok this is all the fault of you guys in here, but I went and got this game on the basis of your enjoyment. This is despite the fact that I am physically incapable of playing FPS games. I can't aim you see. My cursor flicks from one side of the screen to the other like a metronome, only briefly scanning over my intended target. Bullets fly like every target is an agent in the matrix, entire clips are emptied with all the impact of an sclub 7 lyric. 

Despite this I'm still enjoying myself. I stuck all my points in becoming a cyber samurai. I just have to fill my screen with my opponent and spam the hit button.  I'm an FPS badass. I've had one crash that made me very glad I'm not epileptic, but other than that it's a real fun world to role play in so long as the answer to the question is turning everything into squishy lumps of flesh with blades.

I know I'm watching significantly less football than I used to, but how did I get to the point that I have no idea who an English starting player is? Marc Guehi? Never heard of the chap. No idea who he plays for, what position he plays, nope not a thing. I know more about the Kardashians and that is only because of, errrr adult movies.

25 minutes ago, markavfc40 said:

Those who want to leave the Union will believe they'll be better off financially so I'd imagine they'll believe they'll be better able to handle the cost of living crisis if they can govern themselves.

I don't know if them being better off out of the Union would be the case in fairness. What I do know is that had Scotland, along with the rest of the UK stayed in the EU, then they along with the rest of us would be better off. I guess it grieves them more as they voted overwhelmingly to remain in the EU. They were never likely to be duped by self serving right wing chancers like Johnson/Farage though were they.

There is no doubt that Brexit/a Johnson led Tory government will have strengthened those who want independence belief that they would be much better off away from England. An England that has taken to self harm.

If Scotland do go independent I will seriously consider moving there. England under Tory rule is screwed and the system is rigged to make that the most likely outcome. 

It's not that Scotland's chances are great as an individual nation, it's more that England has lost touch with reality. We cheer on a past that never existed at the expense of a future we are wrecking. I'm happy to peel off the I'm with stupid three lions shirt.

13 hours ago, magnkarl said:

Possibly. But there’s a reason why he hasn’t mobilised and his May 9th speech was so flat. He’d need to row back over 100 days of statements about this not being a war, not needing to conscript, not having any trouble at all in Ukraine. It’s a massive loss of face and admitting that he was wrong/lying for 100 days straight. 

This is the brave new world of doublespeak though.  He can simply say that they have always been at war with the Ukraine and NATO, that conscription was inevitable and the size of the NATO fuelled opposition shows how right he was to react to the Nazi Ukrainian aggression in the first place. He can spout any old crap he wants, so long as the media repeat it.

10 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

"If the people are starving and have no beef to eat why don't they simply eat venison?"

 

Holy **** that is real!  I thought it had to be a bit of satire.

1 minute ago, Wainy316 said:

Random thought.  Did Luke Skywalker die a virgin having on kissed one girl (his sister)?

So not a random thought.

8 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

Kennedy and Reagan say hi!

I know they are slightly different circumstances, but they’ll be cited by one side or the other and possibly cited as the case for not changing anything. If we didn’t change the law after Kennedy, why the hell would we change it after the assassination of President Eric Trump? 

If president Eric Trump was assassinated it would probably be the first time in 200 years that a gun was used for its constitutionally intended purpose.

1 hour ago, Rolta said:

Boba is bantha poodoo. 

Not the most erudite criticism I have read, it is however accurate and sums up my feelings nicely.

More Brexit stuff from the Express. 

Just now, sidcow said:

Almost there.... Almost there.... 

They're coming in too fast!

45 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Definitely would take a pot shot. 

Let's blow this thing and go home.

Give Anthony Starr all the awards. As Homelander he is just outrageously good. 

Much happier with episode 3. Some proper character development delivered really nicely and a proper baddy being bad. Action was impactful and stylishly delivered. So, so much better than the first 2.

3 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Mate, I went through this exact thing in the past few years, the bald spot on the top of my head was getting bigger all the time and honestly, shaving it all off was the best thing.

It looks better and is much easier to manage, I guarantee it’s the way forward.

Same here, totally agree.  I'll admit it felt a bit jarring at first, but really used to it now.  I started with a grade 3, but found I was much happier just using the clippers with no guard on at all, going as close as I could without doing the full bic shave.  I now feel my hair has got out of control if it gets to 1cm long.  The hassle of trying to maintain thinning hair is just not worth it.  Shaving it off was so freeing.  Just remember to wear a hat on sunny days.  I learned that the hard way

3 hours ago, Brumerican said:

Damn toddlers and their lack of ability to Meryl Streep it straight out of kindergarten.

I thought she did a great job if you ignore the hilarious running.   She caught the essence of Carrie Fisher superbly IMO.

I could be being a bit harsh because of the running.  I know it's not her fault, but if you are casting for a character that is going to be running a lot, it would surely make sense to check if they can run? 

Maybe I've been spoiled with watching a really high standard of child actor in movies I've seen recently. Dafne Keen in Logan is one that springs to mind. That is a totally different level, but I do understand that the material she was working with was better too. So yea, maybe I'm a little unfair saying she can't act, but I'm certainly not enjoying the character as presented on screen. 

Also, now I feel guilty for slagging off the work of a 9-year-old who was probably doing her best.

Just watched the first 2 episodes of Obe and thought they sucked. So many parts are jarring that the ability to enjoy the show is terminally damaged. Most of the acting is straight up bad with baby Leia and pouty teenage third sister as the worst offenders.

35 minutes ago, TheAuthority said:

I apologize for my laughing emoji. 

"But this time feels a bit different?"

Nothing will change. 

So true, the Republicans have already blocked even having a debate on new gun laws. 3 days after the shooting and they voted on party lines. Snakes the lot of them. This wasn't even to pass a law, it was just to fricking talk about it.

3 minutes ago, choffer said:

400,000,000 guns in America. That's a lot of cash someone needs to find to allow a solution that vast swathes of the country doesn't want. 

They spent $801 billion in one year on the military alone.  Buying back those guns over a period of 10 years would not even make a dent.

Femi is awesome.

There is loads that can be done to combat the problem of mass shootings. It is a big job, it will be difficult, but what is not acceptable is just continuing along the current path. 

The biggest problem is still that any good work done now would simply be destroyed by the next Republican President, but fight that battle when it happens, doing nothing now is unacceptable.

9 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

America is a democracy. Candidates are chosen via a primary process and then voted on a second time in the final election. There is plenty of opportunities for voters to direct policy but their society votes the way it does and gets the result it deserves.

Just today was the Georgian Republican primary elections to decide up coming representative. Marjorie Taylor Greene was one under threat from being unseated, she was up against 5 other Republican candidates with various views and comfortably beat them all. She will most likely go on to retain her seat against which ever Democrat is chosen by their voters. It's the will of the people unfortunately... 

America is a broken democracy. 88% favour the govt negotiating with the pharmaceutical industry to bring down the cost of prescription drugs. It's not happening. 60/70% want abortion to be legally available, it is getting banned. 52% want more gun control and that is going the other way too.

When a party puts its weight behind a candidate on average that candidate will win selection. For example Nancy Pelosi just endorsed Henry Cuellar for Congress. He is an anti abortion candidate with an A rating from the NRA. With that endorsement comes publicity, a stamp of approval from democratic leadership and a shed load of advertising money. Any candidate trying to fight that is starting the race with their shoes tied. It's not impossible, but it is so hard that it is very much the exception when it happens. The same thing happens with a Trump endorsement for the republicans.

The candidates are endorsed for the benefit of the party and the parties work for their donors. The system is rigged, whoever you vote for the money wins.

25 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

It absolutely is the public that is the reason for lack of reform. A majority of people might have an idea they they would prefer tighter gun laws but when they are alone in the voting booth their voting intention is obviously decided on other lines. Gun reform is not important enough for them to be the deciding factor when choosing who to vote for. 

It's not like people are voting for a candidate who campaigns on gun reform but once they are in office decide to become pro gun, against the wishes of those who voted for them. The pro gun candidates told everyone they were pro gun and then were duly elected and are carrying out the mandate they were elected on.

The majority of the public don't have the choice to vote for the gun reform candidate. Neither party will field one if they can help it. That is the point. The influx of money from special interest groups ensures that the system from both parties choose candidates that won't challenge the way things are today. Do you vote for the pro gun republican or the not anti gun democrat?  

Lest we forget, the pro gun republican party did actually lose the last election. Democratic voters are on average more pro some reform of gun laws yet none are forthcoming from their representatives. There is a massive gap between what the public want and what their political class are prepared to deliver.

25 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

It's not as simple as this, is it? 

It'd need an amendment to the constitution, a simple majority in the house and senate isn't going to cut it.

There are loads of reforms they could do before a constitutional amendment would be required. Background check, licensing, banning certain types of weapons and ammo. All can be passed with a simple majority, but isn't.

1 minute ago, Genie said:

There might be many more pro-gun people in the US that are not official NRA members.

Don't doubt it, but I'm only responding to a point that funding is overwhelmingly from its membership.