Maybe this was all an elaborate hoax to boost sales of SimCity 2000?
In all seriousness, I love SimCity franchise, and am completely staying away from this game until the "always on DRM" is changed/removed (just require an online registration? Sounds simple enough). I'm not holding my breath though...
It's OK to regulate [i]videogame[/i] sales to people because they [b]might[/b] make their way to minors, but it's NOT OK to regulate [i]gun[/i] sales to people [b][i]even though[/b][/i] they [b]might[/b] make their way to minors, the mentally ill, and cirminals?
The "cause" (not really a cause, it has not been proven to be true. In fact, it was proven that it is completely inconclusive) is more dangerous than the ACTUAL OBJECT THAT ACTUALLY KILLED THE ACTUAL PEOPLE?
I just graduated law school this past December, and am currently studying for the California Bar in February (fun times...)
I like to take a few minutes every day to take my mind off of whatever it is I am relearning at the time so I don't go crazy (I'm looking at you, Property) and saw this post.
I wasn't the top of my class. I was happy to be in the middle. However, grading is different depending on the school. Some give out A's through F's, and some are strictly on a point scale. Additionally, grades are given out differently. This guy got a B in torts and an A- in Crim Law. Good for him. Compared to the students at his school, he did pretty good.
To contrast, I mentioned that I just graduated. To graduate with honors, you need a cumulative GPA of a 2.8. A 2.8! The valedictorian last year had a 3.4. Compared to my school this guy would crush it. Or would he? Unless grading is standardized across schools (not the case for law schools) it is completely subjective.
Additionally, with our honors cut at 2.8, our Bar pass rate this past July was 78%, and last February was 92%. The State average hovers around 65%. What does that say? Grading scales are subjective.
I heard a funny anecdote a while back, and have learned it rings true: A students are research attorneys, B students are their assistants, and C students are trial attorneys.
I know this is a little later in the thread, and I didn't read all 74 comments before this, but here is what I think (Sorry if it has already been mentioned):
Say the CDC completes a study that is scientifically inconclusive one way or the other, but suggests violent media MAY pose a risk. Thereafter, pro gun legislators pounce, demanding regulation of these types of media to curb violence. My first inclination is they believe the 2nd Amendment is more important than the 1st Amendment. Will anyone call them out on this?
Assume that pro gun rep was in the house, and got a bill passed that heavily restricts violent media in response. What would happen if, in the Senate, an anti-gun rep adds an amendment to the bill, placing the same level of restrictions as are being placed on media, on guns themselves. How big of a BF would the pro-gun side have?
If violent media MAY increase the number of gun related crimes and deserves regulation, shouldn't the actual guns that are actually being used in the actual crimes be subject to the same level of regulation? You can't commit a gun crime if you can't get a gun.
"And I'm not sure how the user is made "better off" by European politicians determining where Google needs to point people with its results."
Easy! Because these politicians use Google, they are "Users." Because they are Users, and don't like the way Google diverts results to them, the Users are harmed until Google diverts results to them in a manner that the politicians prefer, which makes the Users "Better off."
Am I the only one who thinks maybe some employees at certain movie studios are "sharing" movies from competing studios to undermine their sales? If they believe piracy is such a problem, it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to think that by adding copies of competitors' movies to torrent sites, they think it is hurting that other company's sales...
What if the US took a page from Switzerland and Japan, and upon requesting a gun license, be required to take a gun safety/use course, pass a written and application test, and then submit to a mental and physical exam at a local hospital, a background and renew the license (complete with mental/physical evaluations and weapons exams) every two years?