Lurker > Josiah_Is_Back

I think something to consider here is the initial bias that I think creeps into the minds of the jury in any case. In a sense, some people view the fact that the person is being tried in the first place as evidence that they are guilty. I don't know if there's an official name for this but I've heard it being discussed before.

Like yeah the official judicial motto is "innocent until proven guilty," but if jurors already have a preconceived notion about your innocence due to the mere fact that you're on trial in the first place, that sort of skews the whole thing, doesn't it?

Sex is like a conversation. If you're doing it with someone you know and love, it can be fantastic. If you're doing it with someone you hardly know or have no emotional attachment to, then it's just wasting time.

DuranOfForcena posted...

even though that's a severely more brutal and inhumane way for a criminal to meet their end than by something like a lethal injection?

o....kay....

I think someone who rapes and murders a child deserves brutal and inhumane treatment.

bump

This one makes me wonder...

au_gold posted...

Sounds like The Shining.

That's because The Shining theme was also based on "Dies Irae." :)

I hate it when pizza establishments launch a new pizza and then discontinue it.

Little Caesar's pretzel pizzas were amazing, and their bacon-wrapped pizzas.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nVmFlSV1ok

Hambo the Hog posted...

Does the exhibitionist know they're being watched in this instance?

Sure.

Patty_Fleur posted...

Maybe you're right. But people that rape and kill children deserve death.

Many times if the person is caught, convicted and jailed, they will die behind bars anyway. If you catch my drift...

MrResetti posted...

do they know it's an exhibitionist?

I suppose for the sake of this question, yes.

Or would the voyeur be put off by the fact that the exhibitionist is willingly putting on a show and not being spied on unknowingly?

cmiller4642 posted...

Richard Chase

This. He murdered men, women, children, toddlers. He drank their blood and mutilated their corpses.
Kinda hard to "top" that in a sense of being depraved.

Dreamscissors posted...

She didn't write that. A victorian era woman did and she lived to 64

Looks like you're right. I misheard Stack. Apparently she had recited that poem for her family, so they inscribed it on her tombstone.

Either way, still a nice poem.

This was featured on Unsolved Mysteries, felt I had to share:

"Remember me when I am gone away,
Gone far away into the silent land;
When you can no more hold me by the hand
Yet if you should forget me for a while
And afterward remember, do not grieve
For if the darkness and corruption leave
A vestige of the thoughts that once I had,
Better by far that you should forget and smile
Than that you should remember and be sad"

:(

From an episode of Unsolved Mysteries. Jump to 7:37 in the video below.
Basically an anonymous person called some hotline and admitted to the murder of a lady whose killing hadn't been solved. The hotline forwarded it to the police department, who immediately were convinced that the call was genuine due to the sincerity of the voice. But they were never able to definitively link to a suspect.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sL02UTwthg4

Bitter_Virgin posted...

Damn lol. Literally the same shit.

Yeah, seems extremely similar, just with the instrumentation volume toned down and some somber humming added

bump

Alright, who voted Majin Buu's puppy?!

:P

90 lb. preacher curl
https://im3.ezgif.com/tmp/ezgif-3-1b05c6103b6e.gif

135 lb. preacher curl
https://im3.ezgif.com/tmp/ezgif-3-5d26b40b4300.gif

135 lb. strict military press
https://im3.ezgif.com/tmp/ezgif-3-e284f931d2c9.gif

185 lb. military press (one rep strict, the rest with a pop)
https://im3.ezgif.com/tmp/ezgif-3-890ed584aa0b.gif

SocialistGamer posted...

These are all dumb and people who believe them need to go outside.

Not really. E.T.'s species is canonically part of the Star Wars franchise. Knowing that, how else do you explain his magical powers?

DrizztLink posted...

No, no, you don't get it man.
OK, so millions of years from now there's some galaxy out there somewhere, right?

Let's call it Galaxy Prime. In this Galaxy Prime far in the future, they'll have records of events that transpired eons ago (our time) in other areas. The Star Wars films are presented from their perspective, so "a long time ago" to them, is our present.

Let's go

lilORANG posted...

Star Wars - "a long time ago"
TC -"must be the present!"

Brilliant

Reading comprehension.

Several E.T.s are visible in The Phantom Menace, proving that the E.T. race is home to the Star Wars galaxy.

E.T. visited Earth in the year 1982, but the Star Wars films are set "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away."

The Star Wars galaxy is that galaxy far, far away; but our present is the "long time ago."

The Star Wars films are presented from the point-of-view of a completely different galaxy--unrelated to our Milky Way and the Star Wars galaxy--eons in the future.

I thought Anakin's breakdown scene was realistic and well-acted.

Specifically, part of the music that plays during the opening E.T. scene sounds very similar to the "Jedi Fury" music that plays after Luke snaps when Vader mentions turning Leia to the Dark Side.

E.T. (2:40 mark)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilnDB1nl7Xc&list=PLDD384A851C9A979E&t=160s

ROTJ (1:12 mark)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbAVXR49Zic&t=72s

Until the next timeline retcons them, right?

I already posted a video of Carpenter himself saying 2018 "pretends the sequels didn't happen."
That's not saying "This film and the original are the only ones that matter."

RadiantAdolin posted...

I mean, at this point, you're no better than people still arguing that the Star Wars EU is Canon.

Not even remotely similar. This situation would be more akin to an "Episode X" Star Wars movie being released that completely negated every single movie except for A New Hope, and by your logic that would be perfectly fine.

That's fucking dumb.

If you wanna be technical Carpenter never envisioned any sequels at all so the only canon movie is the first.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEM6nAVb6RE

4:15

John Carpenter: "It's pretending the other sequels didn't happen."

Pretending.

Game over.

totalnerdken posted...

Tf? What is this based off of? Not saying you're wrong, but I just have a hard time believing it.

Nothing other than his opinion that because the 2018 movie disregards all others except the original, that they're the only two that matter. As if it's legitimate for the eleventh fucking movie in a franchise to wipe out everythingthat came before it. It makes so much more sense to view the Halloween franchise as a multi-branched series with various timelines.

RadiantAdolin posted...

ROFL no.

Yes.

The only thing Halloween 2018 has that trounces every other film, is the soundtrack. I'll admit that.

It's the best score in the franchise.

Way to miss the point.

Anyway, Halloween II (1981) is a better movie than Halloween 2018, though I like them both; and I give a metaphorical middle finger to anyone who says it doesn't count anymore just because a new movie was made that retcons everything.

Fuck that. Recency < seniority.

You're a broken fucking record, dude.

Allow me to explain to you the flaw in your logic. As I mentioned before, let's rewind to 1998.

Halloween H20 is released, and ignores all the movies except for the first two. You'd be spouting "1, 2 and H20 are the only canon films now! The rest don't matter."

Fast forward 20 years, and now H20 is rendered obsolete, because the '18 version ignores everything but the first movie.

"1978 and 2018 are the only canon films now! The rest don't matter."

OK, provide me a link of any authority on the franchise saying anything to the effect of "Halloween 1978 and Halloween 2018 are the only canonical movies in the franchise now."

RadiantAdolin posted...

Also if we're including non Canon entries, lol @ TC for not mentioning the literal supernatural plot of the thorn Trilogy...

Well including that in the poll would be extraneous, wouldn't you say? Critical thinking...

Irony posted...

Pretty sure this is a joke topic now. Mods please lock

So basically you're saying you're cool with the eleventh movie of a franchise retconning the entire series?

John Carpenter himself said it ignores the other sequels. That doesn't mean it and the original are now the only officially canon films in the franchise.

If you're gonna spout BS, again, please bring some more ammunition.

RadiantAdolin posted...

Yes, it is.

It didn't come from the mouth of Moustapha Akkad so it doesn't matter.

RadiantAdolin posted...

The only Canon entries are the first, and the 2018 movie.

That's not official. Back in 1998 you'd be saying the same shit about H20.
This is simply an alternate timeline.
Halloween is a very convoluted franchise with different branches.
That doesn't mean the current chronology is the only one. It's just a different one.

RadiantAdolin posted...

Most of that isn't canon

I'm obsessed with the franchise. If you're going to spout BS, try harder.

What do you think?

^ all part of the show

SMB3 opens with a curtain and stage; the scenery in the levels appears to be bolted onto the backdrop wall, and when Mario finishes a level, he exits off-stage. The whole thing is a play.

In SM64, Lakitu the cameraman follows Mario around as if filming a movie or TV show.

In Super Mario Sunshine, each shine mission is literally called an "Episode."

They are all actors just putting on performances for our entertainment. This is why in one game Bowser kidnaps Peach and he and Mario are mortal enemies, yet in the next game all of them are playing tennis together like chums.

In Return of the Jedi, Yoda warns Luke, "Do not underestimate the powers of the Emperor," which thanks to the prequels we can now assume that Yoda was in part reflecting on his own failure against Sidious. So why wouldn't he add "oh, by the way, the dude has like insane powers where he can shoot lightning from his fingertips. Be ready for that shit."

I do not. I get what you're saying, though. People interpret such situations as the officer using lethal force unjustifiably; when in reality it's much more feasible to strike the torso of a fleeing criminal, and seeing as the officer was unsure of the man's intentions, he did not want to risk missing or simply wounding (and further angering) the man.

I can understand the dangers of getting shot in the upper leg, due to a femoral injury and the rapid blood loss that would cause. But what about getting shot in the calf region? I suppose that wouldn't necessarily be deleterious enough to stop someone from running away; slow them down, maybe.

It's a tricky situation. Did the officer have anything else on him besides his gun?

Gobstoppers12 posted...

please shut the fuck up

I politely decline your rude request but I will happily respond to any substantive objection you provide to my initial post.

King Rial posted...

Whenever I see a topic/post like this I go to @ you and it's you who made the post. lol

:D