• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

The "anything" thread

If they caught the arms dealer, I'm sure they would be charged with murder.

Even if he was a legitimate arms dealer who was completely oblivious to the culprits intentions?

Whether they'd be convicted is another story, but in my morality, I believe firmly someone like Eric Holder should be charged with the murder of that border patrol agent.
Not a clue what your on about sorry...

You are hanging out with a group of friends and a dude pulls out a pipe and starts smoking crack. The pipe gets passed around and only one other person accepts. If the police show up and see what's going on, do you think they will detain just the two people who did it, or everyone? The police officer is going to laugh at you when you say "How was I supposed to know this guy was going to start smoking crack right next to me?" They will probably let you go later after you've been processed, but that's what happens when you associate with idiots.
You've actually just proved my point right there, you would not be convicted as you have not been breaking the law, as you have not been using or distributing contraband, at worse you we're observing, which isn't a form of involvement and, once again, can not get you arrested. You simply cannot take punishment for crimes others have committed.

I'm not sure if anyone even gave a thought to reading what Floyd said, but he is totally right on the subject. When police are outnumbered, they have the right to defend themselves in a more radical way than the way they are being attacked. It's the nature of the use of force continuum.
I have read what he said and I agree with it to an extent, but the police aren't their to challenge protestors. They are supposed to monitor and intervene when and IF necessary. Using amoured vehicles and police blockades is basically a direct threat to, ofter peaceful protestors, and as the saying goes, if someone shoves you, shove back...

Now I'm not saying that police response is all bad, sometimes bad people do bad things and the have to get involved but when civilians start having to face up against a militerised police with arms and tanks. It's just not right. Especially when these protests are politically charged as the police are more inclined to protect the government then to protect the people. These two have combinations have led to some extremely shocking results

So you're saying if a police officer gets hit with a projectile, it's alright as long as he has adequate protection against it and there should be no repercussions? That's screwed up logic.

Depending on the type of projectile and servery of it, if it's a single rock or bottle thrown, or whats thrown is harmless eg. mud, paint or flour. Then yes you shrug it off, and you sort it out later with the group. You do not go apesh*t and start hurting others who had no intention of hurting you.

If a protestor was protesting alongside a violent protestor and gets hurt, that's too damn bad. He should not have been next to that guy or protesting with that group of people. If the crowd IS coming with the intention or harm to themselves or others, then they have the right to intervine, but they do NOT have the right to do this to others that don't.

Nestor: I followed the London Riots quite closely, and luckily I wasn't there. But from what I read, those seem quite different than the Occupy movement. I'd compare those more to the Vancouver Riots simply because they actually were mass riots filled with idiots trying to take advantage of a situation. These protests are just a bunch of misguided people with a few violent "no goods" in the mix. Unfortunately, until police are able to develop a method to deal with just those people, everyone that is associating with them will have to deal with collateral damage.

So you've just categorized all protests as fools or misguided idiots? Nice one!

I'm not getting into the anarchist/nihilist debate since no one was even talking about that in the first place.

I've never heard of the term nihilist being used in a political context, and we don't have an anarchist movement AFAIK so I can't comment on that either.

Edit: And I believe you are right about the bullies in principle, but ironically, anyone that ever bullied me hate the police. They are all marijuana addicts who laughably hate authority.

There are bullies everywhere, I do not know what has happened to mine, nor do I care, but there are bullies everywhere.

That's what the protestors should be told. They were hanging with the wrong crowd.

I am not sure what the hell you mean by this, protestors are people band together in order to voice a shared cause which has or will impact their lives, protests are not fun days, people sacrifice alot of their own personal life in order to demonstrate, or raise awareness for their cause. As someone who has protested before, and may, if the new NZ laws are introduced, will protest again, I can say that protesting is not fun, people have marched for hours, marched in the rain, given up alot of their time for these things. these aren't gangs your talking about, you do not hand out with the crowd, you are a part of it.

Guys, the world isn't so black and white.

In your above argument, you refused to differentiate protestors and rioters, gerneralised and demonised protesterz as being "just a bunch of misguided people with a few violent "no goods" in the mix.", have repeatedly refused to look at arguments from a different perspective, and, quite frankly, insulted alot of genuine people. Please look back at what you say before you say it...

If the police are heavily outnumbered and that mass of people is trespassing on property without permission and/or throwing projectiles at the police, they will be dealt with. Because of the fact they are outnumbered, the police lawfully and I believe morally have the right to use whatever means necessary to get control.
This above statement say so much more to me then your entire argument then your entire post.

American police aren't as brutal compared to the police of other nations who actually use live rounds.

American authorities have used live rounds on protestors, and some anti-riot units, namely the rubber bullet shooters, usually carry a couple of mags of live rounds, just in case

Unfortunately I don't think I will ever share the same option with you. It's obvious we are not ever going to change each other opinions. I will not be making any more arguments as big and personal as this, as it will only lead us you go around in circles and I have already said what I want to say, I'll still, however, respond to subjects on this matter just don't expect any more text walls from me in regards to this subject.


Thank you.
 
Upvote 0
I've read through a bit of the previous page's discussion.
I had a somewhat similar discussion with a friend of mine about the use of force for SWAT teams.
I told him that they were most likely to cuff up everyone, even the hostages. For some reason he got furious about the idea that he, as an innocent, would be forced down to the ground and be handcuffed like he was one of the hostage takers.
And ofcourse, to some extent, that is understandable: he didnt do anything wrong yet gets the same treatment. In that way it's relateable to the discussion going on here.

However, how would SWAT be able to know who actually is a hostage and a hostage taker? Perhaps there were associates hidden within the group of hostages, acting like them yet carrying a concealed weapon used to scare the hostages into cooperation?
As such, everybody needs to be taken down (not taken down as in being shot to death, but taken down to be arrested) with the possibility of them being agressors, even if they aren't.
You just can't know, and it is for the safety of both the officers as everybody else involved with the situation.

Imo the same thing applies to riots and unruly crowds.
The rioters don't wear a uniform, they cannot be distinguished from the rest of the crowd. If you are in a group that contains people who are throwing bottles, rocks and other such stuff at police officers, you are associated with that group. It's not more than logical that you are.
In the heat of the moment, how is anybody to know any different?
Sure it sucks, but perhaps you should have picked who you hang with a bit more carefully. Nobody can really know ofcourse but there are signs if you can read them in some people.
And imo anybody can detect when a protest is taking a turn for the worst and get the hell out if you don't like where things are going.

The use of force by police can be debated at length too imho.
If they are outnumbered, I could not hold it against them to use a bit more force than perhaps might have been entirely neccesary.
It's called scare tactics. The crowd will know that you might be few, but you will bite back hard, and that despite your numbers you are a force to be reckoned with.
The Dutch riot police (ME) will most likely use water cannons, charges and perhaps rubber bullets but only when taken to the extreme. You won't see shots being fired any time soon afaik.
They have real life scenario training every once in a while wherein they can practice their tactics and such against a group of volunteer 'rioters'.
As such a volunteer, I've been told you can do pretty much anything you want. You can be as violent as you dare, breaking stuff, throwing stuff at the ME, but if you do you can still count on a severe beatdown.
They'll take you down with the same force they would use in a real situation.


Also, I just have to respond to Grabbed:
Even if he was a legitimate arms dealer who was completely oblivious to the culprits intentions?

How could you possibly sell weapons to a person of whom you don't know anything about their intentions?
That is exactly the thing they should check (history of violence, idealistic associations etc.) before they should allow anybody to have a deadly weapon.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Ever been in a riot, disaster? Riot police usually lock down whole sections of the demonstration right away, so getting out of the way might not be as easy as you think.

The police here yas a tendency to lock down demonstrations even before any rioting even starts, as a precauson, so good luck getting out in time.

As for the rest of the discussion, if you don't see why police shouldn't use indiscriminate force(like tear gas and such) against large crowds, where most people are usually innocent... well, I hope you'll never want to protest against something, otherwise you'll be in for a treat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadrach
Upvote 0
A friend of mine recently deployed to Afghanistan as part of the ISAF peacekeeping force. Got an email from him, and the first words describing the place went somewhere along "what an utter sh*t hole". He says the taleban is pretty much avoiding any contact with them though. I guess in general they're concentrating more on the U.S. and Brits.
 
Upvote 0
I was playing some RO 2 classic mode when my cat jumps on my desk and starts to sniff my mouse. She was so fascinated by the device she started to lick and drool on it while I was like "o_O wtf kitty". Also she pushed multiple buttons on my keyboard and now my mousewheel won't scroll up and down. I'm not sure if it's because of the drool or she pressed some weird key combo.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Howcome Christians are hated on so much? (I don't want to argue about whether it's right or not, just why people in the picture and gif thread are posting tons of religious hate pictures)
From my perspective, everyone here seems to be mainly left-wing or liberal and mostly atheist or agnostic. I could be wrong, but that's just my assumption.

I'm Catholic but I love Catholic and religion related jokes, because most of it points out the obvious point that none of that **** makes any sense.
 
Upvote 0
Howcome Christians are hated on so much? (I don't want to argue about whether it's right or not, just why people in the picture and gif thread are posting tons of religious hate pictures)

Because there are some fundamentalistic christian people of public importance who spew out hate and prejudice against people of other beliefs, thus ironically doing themselves what they critizise in others.

Now, while I am an atheist by heart (though baptized as a roman catholic), I am not a missionary. If someone thinks his on her life is better because they subscribe to a set of ideas of any religion, that's fine by me.

Just be polite and don't try to convince me. If one does, I always like to counter it with a Stephen Henry Roberts quote:

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours”

But as I said, I'm okay with religous people, and I call some very religious people dear friends.

From my perspective, everyone here seems to be mainly left-wing or liberal and mostly atheist or agnostic. I could be wrong, but that's just my assumption.
That's because internet forums still are somewhat of an intellectual domain, allthough obviously, that is changing. Why intelligent people should and do lean towards left-wing, liberal and/or atheistic points's of view is quite another debate.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
If someone thinks his on her life is better because they subscribe to a set of ideas of any religion, that's fine by me.

This.

Howcome Christians are hated on so much? (I don't want to argue about whether it's right or not, just why people in the picture and gif thread are posting tons of religious hate pictures)

Hate and poking fun at someone's expense are two entirely different things, especially since OTI you can hardly apply any deeper context unless you're perfectly fine spelling it as frankly as possible, which easily leads to calling names and making presumptions as after all, it's hard to judge what's behind the text from time to time. Triple if someone's trolling or simply going on with\shooting down the argument without any stance for personal amusement.

Whether it's in good taste or not would be better question, but then again virtually everything is target to extreme ridicule OTI.
 
Upvote 0