This teaser/trailer is weak. Yeah there's a little bit of intrigue, but it isn't giving me any sense of excitement. Gee, even the Transformers teaser/trailer is better than this.

I hope SW8 will be better than SW7. SW7 was a minor disappointment. Kylo Ren was laughable as a main villain and the ending duel set-piece was the weakest of all lightsaber duels, it's garbage non-sense.

I enjoyed Rogue 1 more than SW7 for some reason. Although I like Rey more than Jyn.

Tons of Subtleties in this, Specifically that the move Maul uses to try to end the duel is the same one he used to kill Qui-gon, years earlier.

Obi-wan also uses the same form he became famous for, but in the end decides he needs to change forms (From the one we see in the prequels, to what he uses later, while fighting vader. And adapting the same pose Qui-gon had decades earlier).

Neat stuff, Really enjoying this show.

(Also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-0gmL2ecyg for anybody who'd like to see the leadup to the fight.)

Your video, The Duel at Blood Creek - Short Film, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Are you insane? Being a dissatisfied customer doesn't give you the right to commandeer a place of business - that's some crazy level entitled bullshit. If she doesn't get the service she expects, she can down-rate him, she can ask for her money back, she can make a report to the BBB, and she can sue him / Uber for her money back and whatever damages she can prove. She doesn't get to hijack his place of business.

The implications of what you're saying would completely screw over any sane conflict resolution - if I don't like the movie I can stay in the theater until they show me a better one, if my drink was poorly mixed I get to stay in the bar past closing time, if the milk I bought was bad I get to demand that my complaint is resolved by duel in the Kroger dairy section... no. Just because you bought a service does not mean - even if you were screwed over - you get to decide that the place of business now becomes a place of arbitration for your dispute. Take that shit to the proper channels.

As for screaming at her - he terminated their professional relationship at that point, and it was just two private individuals in conflict. Maybe it's 'smart' to kiss up to assholes, but it seems absurd of you to Monday morning quarterback him given that when we didn't see the ride. If he'd used physical violence in any way that would be a completely different story, but you're allowed to scream at people while waiting for the cops or other help.

@Mordhaus

"We have always been a gun violence culture up until the post WW2 era. Think frontier, wild west, duels, and mafia shootouts. We glorify violence everyday, we even give sickos who shoot up groups of people mass media coverage. "

Don't you think that that idea is outdated in 2016? Fine, that's the culture. Change the fucking culture.

When I grew up in Ireland, nobody gave a second thought to driving drunk. Sunday after church, people went to the pub, had a few pints with the neighbours, the kids played space invaders and then the whole family got back in the car and drove home.

And most of the time, it was absolutely fine. People got home, there was the occasional accident, but ya know, what can ya do?

Until it wasn't fine. And it took decades, but eventually, it became socially unacceptable to drive drunk.

"I'm just extremely leery of package deals like lets ban everyone who ends up on a list from having weapons based on a government decision."
I get that. But be reasonable. You're ok with not letting people fly, but you draw the line at owning weapons?

That is some fucked up list of priorities. I would be far more concerned with restricting someones right to travel (essentially restricting their freedom of movement, or a lighter form of incarceration) than whether they can own a gun.

You say that owning a gun is a constitutional right whereas travel isn't. I say that freedom of movement is a fundamental basic human right... oh, look at that, Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights!
"Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state."

I'm completely willing to say that it should be a lot harder to put someone on this kind of list, but there's no way the right to own a weapon is more important than freedom of movement.

Finally, re: slippery slopes
"The Patriot Act, meant to be a well intended set of rules to help us protect ourselves, has been perverted to lessen quite a few of our rights."

The Patriot Act wasn't a slippery slope, it started at the bottom of the slope and went straight over a fucking cliff. It should never have been passed in the first place.

We have always been a gun violence culture up until the post WW2 era. Think frontier, wild west, duels, and mafia shootouts. We glorify violence everyday, we even give sickos who shoot up groups of people mass media coverage. For a person who wants to go out in a blaze of infamy, we are custom tailored to give them their last 15 minutes of 'fame'.

Again, we have a nebulous definition of what it takes to get on the watch list. I could be placed on it simply by stating something to the effect that "I support ISIS", even though I don't. Restricting people who manage to end up on a government list is the same as removing their right to a firearm after committing a felony offense, only you have removed every single bit of their right to a legal defense. There is no due process to being placed on a US watchlist, you get put on and fuck you if it was a mistake. Maybe they'll take you off later, who knows?

I am not going to defend a slippery slope argument on this, I don't have to. It's already happened in the years since 2001. The Patriot Act, meant to be a well intended set of rules to help us protect ourselves, has been perverted to lessen quite a few of our rights. Not only our rights, but other countries. We have violated their security, spied on their people and leaders, and we perform acts of war on their territories with impugnity. All because we lost two buildings and 2,996 people; a heinous act, but one our government exploited to put us into 2 wars with a death toll to people who may not even be our enemies that dwarf our loss. In short, we fucking have the slippery slope process down to a SCIENCE.

"The pinnacle of motor sport met the pinnacle of winter sports" and jumped the shark on Red Bull's retarded string of perceived amazing stunts.

Next up... A trans turtle space fairing balloonist vs. the world championship BLT sandwich making Badminton player in a duel of wits as they race to the top of Olympus Mans on the red planet. The first competitor to the top must chug a jar of pickled mushroom bell bottoms to claim the prize of most inane competition.

Join us on Sunday with Marv Albert in his lingerie to take in this one of a kind Redbull bullshit competition.

Seriously, this is starting to feel like the strange crap Wide World of Sports put out in the 70's.

Your video, Dueling Banjos meets metal, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 17 Badge!

Your video, The Duel, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Hey! We got on the same page!

I did put "need" in quotes, because I am quoting people. Not to be pedantic. Ha.

Yes to everything else. Communicating. It is a bitch. English. Dang. And doing it via the internet? It is less communicating and more dueling monologues.

I think we did really well, though, over all, @newtboy. Thanks for sticking in with me.

You know how sometimes you come across something amazing that everyone else already knows about? Well for me, today was one of those times.

We live in a world in which the USA can challenge Japan to a GIANT ROBOT DUEL.

Your video, USA CHALLENGES JAPAN TO GIANT ROBOT DUEL!, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

How much can this be repeated? The saber fights in the OT were FAR more realistic. The new ones they are barely paying attention, flipping and twisting and spinning and twirling their weapons around in a flashy, showy obviously choreographed dance.In the OT they fought much more slowly but with precision, focus and skill. Each blow had purpose beyond pretty colors flashing on screen. Nobody EVER turned their back on their opponent or (for fuck sake) leaped over them. It helps that the sabre fighting was choreographed by the legendary Bob Anderson who coached Errol Flynn and played Vader in the sabre fights himself.

I know, in this day in age everything in the movies has to be fast, showy and mesmerizing but those original Star Wars sabre duels are so memorable because they were raw and realistic. You think when life or death hangs in the balance you ever actually turn your back to your opponent? Or swirl your weapon flashily? No you make every strike, country, parry and guard a deliberate action. It's about outmaneuvering and out thinking your opponent, not how many blows you get in per second.

lucky760's reasoning is sound.

Anyone that has researched and/or trained on weapon on weapon defense, in this case knife vs. firearm knows the Tueller's Drill. It has been a standard for over thirty years. Basically,

The Tueller Drill is a self-defense training exercise to prepare against a short-range knife attack when armed only with a holstered handgun.
Sergeant Dennis Tueller, of the Salt Lake City, Utah Police Department wondered how quickly an attacker with a knife could cover 21 feet (6.4 m), so he timed volunteers as they raced to stab the target. He determined that it could be done in 1.5 seconds. These results were first published as an article in SWAT magazine in 1983 and in a police training video by the same title, "How Close is Too Close?"[1]
A defender with a gun has a dilemma. If he shoots too early, he risks being charged with murder. If he waits until the attacker is definitely within striking range so there is no question about motives, he risks injury and even death. The Tueller experiments quantified a "danger zone" where an attacker presented a clear threat.[2]
The Tueller Drill combines both parts of the original time trials by Tueller. There are several ways it can be conducted:[3]
The "attacker and shooter are positioned back-to-back. At the signal, the attacker sprints away from the shooter, and the shooter unholsters his gun and shoots at the target 21 feet (6.4 m) in front of him. The attacker stops as soon as the shot is fired. The shooter is successful only if his shot is good and if the runner did not cover 21 feet (6.4 m).
A more stressful arrangement is to have the attacker begin 21 feet (6.4 m) behind the shooter and run towards the shooter. The shooter is successful only if he was able take a good shot before he is tapped on the back by the attacker.
If the shooter is armed with only a training replica gun, a full-contact drill may be done with the attacker running towards the shooter. In this variation, the shooter should practice side-stepping the attacker while he is drawing the gun.
Mythbusters covered the drill in the 2012 episode "Duel Dilemmas". At 20 feet the gun wielder was able to shoot the charging knife attacker just as he reached the shooter. At shorter distances the knife wielder was always able to stab prior to being shot. (Wikipedia)

That a firearm, particularly a handgun, will instantly incapacitate an individual is not a working concept and is fallacious. Variables such as adrenaline and drugs are attributable. Shot placement is trumps. Anything but a CNS. central nervous system, shot is not efficacious in safely stopping the threat. Not an easy or sure target sans movement, stress, etc.

Law enforcement put their lives and safety in harm's way every day. They are not there to die needlessly. An individual with suicide by cop or a LEO's death in mind is a serious threat to be dealt with with prejudice.

By the way, research knife wounds vs. handgun wounds. There is much data, ER, medical examiner, law enforcement. The deadly seriousness of knife wounds are well documented.

Tasers...I would not want to risk my life behind one or anyone about whom I care.

Oh dear lord!!!

I just found out that I insulted you!

Turns out it is ME who is the noob.

I thought noob meant new person. That's all. A new person to the Sift. A very kind individual has told me that noob means new person who fucks things up because they don't know what they are doing.

So I am the noob. The fuck up.

I hope the sock puppet comment isn't insulting, too. There are a lot of sock puppets on the Sift, a history of them. I am still learning how to deal with sock puppets -- my initial reaction is to feel like I am being badly used. I am trying to get over that feeling.

Anyway. Yeah. I'm just trying to be friendly to someone who has engaged with me, and to engage intellectually other than in dueling comments. (That is what I call the back and forth of comment streams -- dueling monologues.)