Xenidal

You were judging his actions as right (i.e. the opposite of wrong) based on non-existent information which was not even in the article. Makes no sense really.It's one thing to say that he should be given the benefit of the doubt since neither of us were there... it's completely different to do as you did and say "you're wrong because the officer was clearly in the right" when you yourself were not there and have no idea if he even was in the right or not.

---

Ever since Rare left Nintendo then we haven't had a single "great" Donkey Kong game. We got Donkey Konga / Donkey Konga 2 (which aren't even "Donkey Kong" games... just rhythm games that were DK-themed), DK Jungle Beat (not "traditional" and definitely a lesser game than DK64), and the "best" one we've had since DK64 was DK Country Returns... although I didn't like it (this is my personal opinion though... I typically don't like platformers in general) I'm not saying any of those 4 games were "bad" (I actually enjoyed Jungle Beat and the Donkey Kongas were a lot of fun) but none of these are in the class of DK64. To make this worse... there hasn't been a single action-adventure game like DK64 or the Banjo-Kazooie series since the days of N64 (which coincides with the time that Rare left...) Out of the few action-adventure games we have gotten, none are able to match the greatness of DK64. It's as if the whole genre has died (except for the Zelda series). I don't like this fact at all, as action-adventure is one of my favourite genres... now I'm stuck with pretty much just RPGs...

Because that would be a Mac... not a PC at all. And it'd be so awesome that Game Freak wouldn't have been able to do it justice, lol

A girl named Christian? That's unusual.I knew a boy named Christian. And my middle name is Christian.

That's a bit hypocritical considering that you too are judging the police officer's actions without being there and knowing for sure that he did the right thing.I was not saying outright that he was wrong, I was posting that based on the information from the article he should not have shot the guy (which makes it seem like a case of excessive force or a "shoot first and deal with it later" scenario). I even said (twice) that I didn't know anything about the situation other than what's in the article... of course if the situation was different then what I've been saying cannot be applied to the situation.

Of course I won't "play the hero"... I am not a police officer... I have no training other than a few karate lessons and I certainly don't carry around any sort of nonlethal weapons (or any weapons for that matter).You can say that the situation called for it all you want but the fact remains... you were not there. Your idea of what happened is just as good as my idea of what happened. As for investigating the officer... who knows? That happened Saturday... even if an investigation was underway then it wouldn't be in the news yet. I'm just going by what's in the article... there could very well be more to the story than what we see (for example, for all any of us know the police officer may very well have attempted to stop the attacker before resorting to his gun...)

I believe that I had already answered that... Police have special training... that's how they are able to take down a man twice their size or a man armed with a weapon without being killed themselves. Now this attacker... he was not a super-human or anything. He was not immortal / invincible / invulnerable. Why would the laws of physics which apply to other criminals and to other attackers not apply to this man? In addition to training, police carry non-lethal weapons such as tasers (which would could have easily incapacitated the attacker). Surely he could have done something rather than shoot the man (which is excessive force and not at all part of his job)

YAHOOO!!!!!!!!!!

Umm... I never said that the victim's life was not threatened. And neither did I say that he would have stopped on his own. What I said was that the attacker could not have killed the victim if he was not in contact with the victim. If he was restrained then he wouldn't still be on the victim, gnawing on his face. And neither would he have been out attacking someone else. And if he had waited for backup to arrive then it would have had no effect on the victim living or dieing. Once the attacker was removed from the victim (whether he was shot dead or restrained) then the victim would still have to wait for the ambulance... killing the guy isn't going to make the ambulance arrive any more quickly. What makes me think he could have been restrained? Well, first off, he was unarmed. If a police officer is able to tackle a man armed with a knife or a gun and take him into custody then why could a completely unarmed man not have been able to be dealt with? If he resists arrest and won't snap out of the frenzy then why not shoot him with a taser or something? As for him being on drugs... the way I see it, either he was on drugs, he was criminally insane (which I suppose you're implying by calling him "psycho"), or he was an evil man who chose to commit the act. Drugs - not his fault (although he'd still need to be held responsible) Insane - not his fault (and he wouldn't be responsible... instead he'd be sent to the asylum) Murder - entirely his fault How do we tell the difference? That's what a trial is for...

I would say Good Charlotte, but I've recently found out that they've helped out liberal political groups which I strongly oppose (and I'm not referring to PETA... I was aware that they support PETA and I don't really care about that). So that counts against them in my opinion. Also I can't exactly say that I like them, as I really only like 2 of their albums. And on one of those albums is a song which contains a seemingly random reference to masturbation... which I really don't want to be listening to. That, and it is incredibly stupid. The song has nothing to do with masturbation but they through in that line for no reason at all. None of their other songs do anything like that at all... Still, Good Charlotte is the only band I have songs from. All my other songs are from "singers" rather than bands, or are from soundtracks and the like. I generally don't listen to music all that much in the first place.

First off, the attacker would not have been able to kill the victim if the police officer had restrained him. Restraining the attacker would not have ended any worse than killing him. I'm not at all saying he should have called in back-up and then stand around doing nothing while watching the attacker kill the victim...Second, I don't judge the value of peoples's lives but there's no indication of who's life was more "valuable". The attacker was high on drugs... nothing that he did was any indication of how good or bad of a person he was. And we don't know anything about the victim either... the fact that he was attacked does not automatically make him a better person than his attacker (who's perception was obviously altered). Third, for all we know the victim did start the attack, causing the attacker to go into a rage. Now I'm not at all saying that he did... I'm saying that the police officer had no idea. And you can't say "a victim would never have taken it that far and eaten another man's flesh" or "a victim would have stopped when the officer told him to" because the man was high on drugs. Of course he won't react in the way you'd expect... Lastly, yes, police officers are allowed to shoot people who are about to kill someone / in the process of killing someone... but they shouldn't (and probably aren't allowed to) shoot people if they are able to handle the situation in a different way (which again, I don't know the details of this situation. But it looks like he could have been able to restrain the attacker, preventing him from killing the other guy without killing him)

I saw that on Bulbapedia a while back. Anyway, I seriously doubt it. Most likely just coincidence.

No... he was supposed to do what police officers are supposed to do and call in back-up, and restrain the attacker until the back-up arrives and the arrest is able to be made.Police can't just go around shooting people, even violent criminals who are attacking someone. Police shouldn't even use their guns except as a last resort... now I don't know the situation at all but that attacker wasn't even armed. He more than likely could have been restrained and taken into custody.

English and that's all. But I've had some experience in Spansh, Latin, Japanese, and Chinese. Spanish - 4 years in high school (doing poorly in the 4th year because I was forced to skip over the normal "Spanish IV" and go straight to Conversational which was beyond my level). I can probably figure out some sentences written in Spanish (assuming that they don't use difficult vocab) but I really can't speak it... at least not at the pace of a Spanish speaker. And I've never really tried learning more after that since I don't have much of an interest in Spanish. In college I began learning Latin but it confused me very much (never even heard of the concept of "declension" before taking it... and considering I hated conjugating verbs in Spanish then this was even worse). So that, and the fact that Latin wasn't all that useful, lead me to quit taking it. I then took Japanese, which I loved. Japanese I was a piece of cake. But then I took Japanese II and the way the class was done... I just hated it. And I failed and was forced to drop the class. It was as if the class shifted from actually learning Japanese to simply memorizing tons of vocab which I really don't like at all (even though I know that you can't speak the language without knowing the words, lol). I would continue taking it but I really don't know where... no other school seems to offer it (when I do find it then the class ends up cancelled for low attendance) and I can't go back to that first school because it'll probably end the same way. Oh, and somewhere along the lines I took a brief Chinese class but that went bad. First off, the class itself was structured such that we didn't ever even learn the basics... the teacher just taught us some seemingly random topic throughout the course. We briefly went over pronunciation, which is when I learned of the "tones" (each vowel has like 4 or 5 different ways of pronouncing it and you basically have to "sing" them or else you're saying the word wrong). That alone makes me never want to learn... I simply can't do it. Besides real-world languages, ɥsıןƃuǝ uʍop ǝpısdn pɐǝɹ uɐɔ ı and igpay atinlay ...flashw dn apew i "agenguel" e ,ysilgua patja^ui se llam se ⧜⊂ᴑ̅·∿o⨍ɪ⧜⊂...·(⧜∿ᶴo·Ɛʏ·ow⊂·∆∿⋿⧜੮ɪo⊂) println("and I know several programming languages"); Also out of curiousity I've learned about Ancient Egyptian, although I've never attempted to learn the language itself.

Offtopic - watch YuYu Hakusho... my favourite anime of all time (except toward the end when it just got too weird...)

Did you know that the eighteenth root of March 10th is dx/dy of ∫√((-π)^(mc²)) dx on [p⊃q/q⊃r//p⊃r, c]?

Hmmm... yeah, the ending was a bit disappointing. I actually wouldn't have minded if the "fake ending" was the actual ending.

It could help you to make new friends. Especially Pokémon White 2 (back when I was in college a few years back then Pokémon Diamond / Pearl were quite popular... everyone in the game club was trading and stuff) I'd get them all (whether by buying them or receiving them as gifts) as soon as possible. Probably just my personal experience... but sometimes I've put off buying games and then they stop selling the games by the time I decide to buy them... forcing me to either buy it used or pay some inflated price for a new copy from an online seller.

Reposting here because the other thread was deleted... Soul Eater is awesome. It ended early because they completed the story and didn't want to tack on pointless episodes for the sake of continuing it. I actually prefer shorter serieses. The "fake ending" at the end of season 1 was very well done. I've got a few beefs but overall it was a great series. What I didn't like was mostly: - at the end of the second half then they added too many characters without doing enough character development - some of the details made absolutely no sense

Whoa, did I miss something? What's this "KH3D Mark of Mastery" and what happened to Dream Drop Distance? I have a Super Monkey Ball game, that Mario game (haven't played it yet), OOT 3D (haven't played it yet), Pokémon Rumble whatever it's called (haven't played it yet), and I think that's it. And Pokédex 3D and Four Swords from the eShop.

Just a Wii and I almost never play it (in my opinion most games these days have gotten worse or are just plain gimmicky...) I don't intend on ever getting an XBox 360 and I will only buy a PS3 when KHIII comes out for the sole purpose of playing that single game.

This is just... weird. Like an April Fools Day article, but... not written on April 1. A guy ate another guy's face... and as if that wasn't weird enough, he was naked? And there's more... the victim was also naked?! And to add to all that, the police killed the attacker instead of taking him into custody?! Really, that officer shouldn't have killed him... especially if he was high on drugs and not in control of his actions at the time...

That makes no sense. Maybe for free games where they have to make money somehow (although still a bad idea)... but definitely not for games you pay for. And why do they need a patent for this? It's not a new concept... I've played games with in-game advertising before. Just none that automatically pause the game in the middle of it. And how are they even legally allowed to have a patent on something as general as this? That's like... I patent TV commercials and then sue every channel everytime a commercial comes up because they "stole my idea". You can't patent a non-original idea...

Order of the Phoenix is understandable... they left out one of the best parts (the flashbacks of Harry's dad and Snape and all that...) And overall it was boring. I hated the book... it was way too long and nothing really happened in it. (and then people complained that the movie was too short... the longest book in the series became the shortest movie, lol)Half-blood Prince... no idea why you hated that. That was one of my favourites. Still, I don't consider any of the Harry Potter movies to be "sequels" anyway. They're a series... they've always been a series. It's not like after the conclusion of the first one then they re-visited it because it did well or anything.