Try not paying taxes next year....see how long it takes IRS agents with fully automatic weapons to enter your residence and confiscate your belongings and take you to jail.


Generally they try garnishing wages first. The showing up with weapons and hauling you off bit happens when you don't show up in court and then disregard a court order and then they give you a "contempt of court" citation.

I agree, if I could call a do-over on American energy policy I'd have slowly cranked up gasoline tax over the last 3 decades so that it was something like $8-$9 dollars a gallon in 2000. The marketplace would've slowly adapted to that over the years, and we could have used the extra revenue for public transportation, or incentives for consumers and business to come up with alternatives (though high gas prices probably would've done the trick).

These aren't consumer incentives, thats government regulation. What I mean is as a consumer choosing not to buy inefficient cars, or seeking alternatives to gasoline dependence such as public transportation or carpooling, or inflating your tires (ha)--in order to reduce demand and thus reduce the price of gas.

Have you been beaten for not paying taxes? Have you heard of someone who has

Try not paying taxes next year....see how long it takes IRS agents with fully automatic weapons to enter your residence and confiscate your belongings and take you to jail.

>> ^Farhad2000:
This will probably awesome, garner impressive reviews, poach a bunch of awards and sell about 10 copies before fading into Top 10 lists and bitter feelings of discontent to those that bought it but don't understand why other gamers are so stupid.
Much like Psychonauts before it.


But-but... Grim Fandango was successful in the 90's, right? So what if it occurred to gamers post-Y2K that automatic weapons and grenade launchers were more fun than "Pick up item" and "Open satchel" -- the demographics can change, I swear!

you sure it's completely illegal to own a fully automatic weapon? military weapon collectors surely would have some in their possession.

>> ^spoco2:
I'm sorry, but this blind adherence to a text written in the 18th Century is quite simply baffling to the rest of the world. It's no better than bible bashes picking certain texts from the bible and focusing on them with great fervor.

If we want to argue that the document could use updated there might be a point to that but we can't just ignore one 18th century aspect without ignoring and weakening the other 9 articles of the Bill of Rights as well. Free speech, due process, and so on. We've tried that with drug war exceptions for search and seizure among other things as well as with efforts to outlaw rather than control guns in some cities and not only did it not offer the positive results we intended but it also made it so much easier to get away with other apparent violations of the Constitution that we've seen so much of in recent years.

The problem is that once we decide to ignore one part of it for our own reasons the precedent is set and others can just as easily ignore other parts for their reasons too. Either the document means something or it doesn't. If it does mean something one Amendment means as much as the next, it's all the law.

Compromises between various rights where they might conflict with each other we can and do make, gun control in simple terms can mean something as basic as they can't carry one without a license to carry or they don't need a tripod mounted automatic weapon on their roof. But to try to carry it to the next step and restrict the right to own one at all, we really do need to adjust the Constitution itself unless we are willing to risk major damage to the whole document and I don't believe the majority of the nation really wants either.

Yeah, that's why I thought the reenactments were wasted time. If it got bad enough we might manage a resistance somewhat like in Iraq but the days of the citizens taking on a modern military straight up have been over for a while now. The main use as far as I can tell is just in the criminal never knowing which home they'll face a gun in, or in concealed carry States the same argument could be made for confronting people on the streets or carjacking.

There's always the good old Constitutional rights thing too. Fully automatic weapons are available under some circumstances and most outside of the movie studios don't have a real use past entertainment so use hasn't been the real legal test so far, though some argue that it should be. We've had a vid or two here showing them fired at ranges I'm pretty sure.

cow-jacking near a marshall....that's a star
stealing ammonia from farmers for yer lab in Oklahoma and spotted....two stars
hunting without a license with fully automatic weapons....they have to call Wichita for a helicopter.....

Rights afforded and/or denied is an issue apart from whether or not a society agrees to unions of same sex couples, and calls it marriage-This becomes a simple matter of will and responsibility, when you approach it from this angle.

Do what you will, when you will, with whom you will, and accept the responsibility which comes with your chosen path of action, within the paradigm you find yourself in. If I wanted to feel like the world was a fair place for m,yself and my gay lover, I would probably move away from a society that tried to stone me, or otherwise made life miserable for me. You must navigate the planet in whatever place in time and space you find it in. If you wanted to worship your idea of God contrary to that of the Vatican's in the 1500's, you dis so in a closet, or you faced them defiantly in public....AND ACCEPTED CONSEQUENCES

You want to own fully-automatic weapons in the United States? Do so, but be ready to accept the responsibility that comes with discharging it and having some idiot report you.

You want to keep all the money you earn, and pay no Federal Income Tax, fine. Don't be a idiot, and leave yourself no outs, if the IRS catches up, yer fucked.

Why, the marriage of homosexuality and Christianity is only a boar's hair away from reality. The devout of every religion take care of their member's needs in the form of a community of pooled resources....Start a gay church, 501. C. 3 status is granted, and adopt as your by-laws that a portion of tithes go to a fund to offset the horrifying inconvenience of not having the full checklist of bennies that hetero couples get. Or stay single on paper fer crissakes, and give it a whine elsewhere-If you wish to see a city liberated from the bonds of a nation's social convention, free to express themselves openly, all manner of human aberration resides in San Francisco, a bunch of flakes with no internal compass whatsoever, a truly lovely city, a fucked city government, crime crawling up it's ass from all the "tolerance" their state, and their city legislatures drizzle.....lived there-saw that-would not wish it on a country......

Oh and berticus-not everything on that wiki list is exclusive rights and privileges for married couples only, and inflammatory rhetoric like "either or...live in a theocracy" is horseshit-there is no divine ruler recognized in any country on earth, that type of nonsense semantic exercise is tactic used by the most vocal of the homosexual rights advocates, of religious nut-bags, and brown-shirt Nazi assholes.....

Lessee....back in the 18's, Joe Smith left a bunch of heathens and started his own, superior religion, that has grown into one of the most successful cults in the world....even got their own state, and their own presidential candidate...it doesn't mean they had it easy.....

To address a couple of points that have been mentioned:
"Get yourself some stricter gun-laws. Nobody, NOBODY needs a fuckin AK or an M16 for anything else than becoming a fucking killing machine."
First, fully-automatic (select-fire) weapons are restricted for purchase to individuals under fairly strenuous requirements, including permission from local law enforcement. (This is termed a "Class 3 Transfer", and obtaining the signature from local law enforcement is understandably difficult.) That said, many automatic weapons are obtained illegally. Second, fully-automatic weapons (and Assault Rifles), while potentially menacing, are NOT a significant contributor to gun crime. I may be misinformed, but the data I looked at placed their involvement in less than 1% of all gun crimes. Handguns are the firearm of choice in the vast majority of gun crimes.

"We are talking criminals here. Since when do they deserve any rights at all? They're human? No. They're animals. When they turn their backs on the law the law should turn its back on them."
There is no such thing as an "evil person." I stand by this assertion. There are people whose perspectives are warped to the point that incarceration is the only means to prevent inevitable harm to society at large, but no one should be denied due process unless doing so would infringe upon another person's inalienable rights. The justice system (and the term means something - it means to "make just" or to "make equal" a situation that has become imbalanced with respect to a person's rights) serves both to attempt to restore balance to inequity in so much as it can, and also to levy punishments sufficient in severity to discourage future crimes from the perpetrator and those who would consider similar actions. For the law to turn its back on "criminals" is to render it useless and return us to an anarchic state.

Society, and by extension, government, exists as a framework for its citizens to submit to the sacrifice of certain freedoms in order to assure that the rest of the citizens are similarly denied those freedoms. We voluntarily submit to be protected from ourselves, to the degree we deem acceptable in exchange for the security that provides. I do not feel the security provided by the criminalization of firearms is worth giving up my own ability to own one. This is a weighted judgment. Similarly, I *do* feel that the security provided by the criminalization of driving while intoxicated justifies my personal loss of the freedom to drive in any dang state I deem reasonable.

By that token, I am perfectly willing to give up my freedom to kill anyone who I deem worthy of the act to ensure that the government will do what it can to prevent others from exercising that freedom against me, but I have no reservations allowing my fellow citizens (and therefore myself) the freedom to kill intruders in their own homes.

Who the hell says this is a terrorist? There are non terrorist Arabs you know? It's just that many people there have automatic weapons. Are these guys terrorists? They are Arabs, and they make YouTube videos...

Are you in the states eric3579??
Happy to say that also part of the rich heritage enjoyed as a citizen of a once great nation, that Texas is roughly the same size as Spain or Germany in sq mi., that she is the only state whose constitution affords the caveat of secession, and unlike California, Illinois, and other piss-poor examples of brain-dead, knee-jerk legesilation, does not scream for laws limiting or banning the sale or ownership of weapons, simply because one of our, mentally divergent citizens decides to take out innocents then kill themselevs with firearms.........


some folks collect stamps, some seashells, these enthusiasts
play with automatic weapons.......

A weapon is a tool, like a shovel. They perform useful tasks, and can be used as weapons in the hands of men......

Outlaw shit-think, not tools.........

This happened about 20 miles from my house. Within a year or two of this we also had an airman open fire in a hospital with an automatic weapon.

http://www.ipmba.org/newsletter-0010-airman.htm

Makes me proud of my home town ...

I really hope someone like Michael Bay uses this suit in a kickass parkour-inspired sequence with automatic weapons and explosions... that would be SWEET.