RichieMcD

I'm not 18 yet, only 16 but suppose 16 is somewhat considered significant, didn't really have a party for 16, just went to a club with some friends and got pretty pissed. One of my best friends is 16 and his birthday is 2 days before mine, we had a joint birthday session and plan on having a big [wagon] joint 18th party. I doubt I'll feel much different at 18, I already get served drink and smokes now and get in to most clubs, the ones I'd want to go to anyway. Suppose the only real difference for me will be driving, couldn't give a [cabbage] about voting. I can also legally enroll in the army on my own consent, no parental needed.

Yes they should definitely improve their security but how obvious was an attack of this scale. It was properly planned out to cause as much destruction as possible, they hit multiple locations at once, killed westerners and caused destruction to the buildings through fire and grenades. This should be almost viewed like 9/11, an atrocity to be used as a learning experience so it doesn't happen again.

Not sure if you could under your local law system, but if I was in that situation I would write a letter about how unprofessional they're acting, how their staff can't seem to perform something very basic and if they send you one more letter which isn't a letter of apology you'll bring charges of harassment against the store in question.

Rhetorical question, boxers obviously

You're probably going to end up regretting buying it, heavy, ugly and will eventually get in the way. Would be better off buying something like This. Ok price wise, can withstand a shotgun blast and is very good for anti fogging. As soon as you start running around with the gas mask on you're seriously going to regret it's weight and lack of proper airflow.

Considering I still have 2 years till College, which I'm still considering even attending I can't offer much information on that front. The only similarity I can offer is when I came to my current school I knew nobody but joined the Rugby team, Lifesaving squad and I'm always in the school Gym. I made pretty much all my friends through mostly Rugby and the Gym, also Got on the school Rugby team which is the school sport, meaning a lot of people ended up knowing who I was so it was much easier to make even more friends or talk to others. So if you join some sports teams / clubs / societies within the College you'll make some friends pretty easily. If you're in a fraternity, as long as they're pretty cool you're almost guaranteed to make some cool friends and have some epic parties as long as you aren't socially [developmentally delayed]ed. I can't really imagine much negatives to being in a Fraternity, then again I'm only viewing College as 4 years of partying and barely passing exams. Really the easiest way to make friends in a School or College is to make a name for yourself in a positive way, get on a popular team, really liked guy, well known partier etc. Anything really which is a positive and makes you more noticeable will get you friends quickly. Be one of those guys people want to hang with.

And you are who? Don't mean to sound mean, but with 21 posts it's not exactly like you'd be known well. Exactly what the poster above me said, if you can't even take some immature criticism over the internet you'll never get anywhere in life nor the business world.

Not entirely sure on this, but I think a lot of it is down to taxes and also importing Oil instead of producing it like America does. In Ireland something like 65% of the Petrol price is tax.

exactly. reduce taxes for people who use cars as transportation, dont start charging extra for people who use cars as there fun and enjoyment after school/work. if they start charging extra for big vehicles, why dont they charge extra for people who play golf? maybe put in some taxes to bring the price of golf balls/clubs up so all the people who play golf for fun have to pay more like all the people who tinker with cars for fun. It's completely irrelevant to compare those two. Golf doesn't produce harmful Co2 gases or consume more petrol which is obviously enough gradual getting lower. Taxing people for an outdoor activity which promotes better health and fitness while not producing harmful side effects is just crazy. Wouldn't care about taxing the transportation aspect of golf, driving to and back from the Golf Club but taxing them extra for the actual Golf? That's actually an incentive not to exercise and further improve their health, sure makes a lot of health :|

I consider SUV's solely as vanity products as most built nowadays aren't even built for their intended purpose, off-road transportation. Most wouldn't even last on a 4x4 track. There's no need for them, they use excessive petrol and cost a lot. Really useful post there as well Knightlite :thumbsup: [/sarcasm]

During the civil right movements if the Black protesters would even try to do it through violence whether it would've been mere fist fighting to full on gun battles, as soon as they were caught they would be beaten, locked up and knowing the time possibly even executed through death penalty. It would've been illogical for them to fight back through violence as it wouldn't help their cause at all. When you say eliminate the threat what do you mean? If you mean intending on actually killing the intruder that is pretty worrying, shows how little a life is valued at. I assume you mean you'd incapacitate him such as a shot to the leg and arm if necessary.

This is absolute spam. It's not stock brokers fault for the global crash, it's not people a couple of people playing games at work, It's completely different. It's merely a video of someone slacking off at work, which people do occasionally.

1. Absolutely no need for Assault rifles in any way or form other than Police forces, ban them from public ownership completely. 2. IMO also ban high power handguns such as Magnum revolvers or Desert Eagles, keep defense simple and reliable such as Glock 9mm or Colt .45, no need to implode the persons head / chest etc. 3. Yes, but don't just give them to anyone obviously, strict guidelines and a mandatory mental evaluation at the buyers expense. 4. Sounds good, yet once again same as above but stricter mental evaluation and gun control skills type exam. 5. Yes, obviously with a permit subject to the same as 3. Allow them only to be used and removed from a carrier bag / box within certain hunting designated areas. 6. Obviously, I'd go with a 0 tolerance policy on any form of violent or drug addiction crime. Instead of attacking the leaves of a large tree, tackle it at the roots. Change attitudes towards guns starting very early with children, their not cool nor manly to own, their serious objects which can play the power of god within the pull of a trigger.

Are you kidding me? We wear pads, doesn't that make us the smarter country? Some of the hits you see in the NFL would never occur in Rugby (I've watched both), because you would literally die from it. When I go home over Winter Holidays, I'll take a picture of my facemask from my Semi-Pro team and upload it for you. I would literally be dead without that thing. There's two pretty different goals of tackling though when comparing American football to Rugby. In AF it's just hit the guy, get him to ground while in Rugby you must hit, keep him up and rip the ball or bring him to ground depending on how much support yours or the opposition side has close by, then once tackled you must make sure he doesn't get up and make it hard for him to feed the ball back easily without giving away a penalty. If Rugby players were to spend the whole game throwing in AF tackles there'd be a lot more tries scored per game as less Rucks / Mauls would form. Both games are very close on terms of the beating your body takes, after you come in from a game of Rugby after spending 80 minutes tackling, being tackled, rucking and mauling with very few breaks longer than 10 seconds other than half time you're certainly going to feel it everywhere on your body as everywhere will get hit.

Shooting and missing the heart is attempted murder,I'm pretty sure some other part of his chest cavity would be harmed. Yes, but in your example, harm was done. If the assailant did not even manage to get anywhere near the person he/she intended to kill, I would not convict that person. So they can be released again to have another go? Flight 93 didn't get anywhere near it's target and didn't harm it's target, might as well not charge those who helped carry out the act so they can train more suicide / hijacking crews :thumbup: If they miss and don't cause physical harm doesn't mean mental harm isn't caused, any form of mental conditions could be formed from such event, paranoia, depression, not being able to leave ones home. Doesn't have to by physical for it to be harm. I wonder how much your opinion would differ if someone shot at you, missed and got another go without any hassle? =D>

Not sure about American law, but under Irish that wouldn't be attempted murder, it's just severe bodly harm. Attempted murder only is a placeable charge when the person was intent on killing but didn't succeed.

Very saddening, obviously we don't know why but it could be any matter of thing, ashamed of his body perhaps which was multiplied by the fact he had bi-polar. I don't see though how the website is in anyway to blame or liable, if the guy wanted to broadcast him committing suicide he'd find some way of doing it. No need to ruin the website for something their not to blame for.

You've completely misunderstood me, what I mean by abolishing is that if you attempted to murder to someone and fail you should still be charged with murder or attempted murder has the same punishment as murder, not the abolishment of it so that if you fail at murder you get off free.

Potentially the criteria could just follow the differences between murder / manslaughter. Under Irish law anyway murder is the intention to kill, Ie premeditated while manslaughter is intention to cause severe bodly harm without intending to kill or reckless endangerment which leads to death Ie drunk driving. If they were to follow the lines of murder, as in the criminal was intending to kill then charge them with attempted murder which should have the same charge, unfortunately though it would probably be easy enough for the criminal to plead guilty under manslaughter in certain cases, Ie intending to cause severe bodly harm without the intention to kill.

We had a debate the other day in school on the abolishment of attempted murder and I though I'd create a thread for it as it seems a topic for good debate / discussion. My view on it would be if someone sets out to kill someone, does not fully succeed in it and their victim/s still manage to live they still should not be entitled to a lesser jail sentence, they set out to kill someone and if they succeeded they would receive a lengthy sentence, mandatory life sentence in most countries but just because they failed at doing something so monstrous they are entitled to a lesser sentence? That's inhumane to the victims. Of course there is the argument to it when they were going through the act of murder a sudden "impulse" occurred to stop and they didn't follow through with it, I.e they were planning to kill the person but couldn't pull themselves to it but I feel this isn't an adequate excuse to allow someone a lesser sentence, if anything it should come under "severe bodly harm" with a much more severe sentence. I'll try to expand on the various arguments later on, but for now I suppose discuss and debate.

My Mom - Always understands me, why I do stupid things and always backs me. Would be a completely cool parent but unfortunately she wont let me do certain things as my dad would give her grief about. Would do anything for her and she'd do the same. My Dad - I can't stand him, even my friends notice the tension between me and him although he doesn't notice it himself, still thinks I like him. What I hate most about him is he has achieved hugely in his life, he pretty much came from a "ghetto" school, he's the only person from his old class to earn over a 5 figure sum a year and one of 4 to attend college from his entire year at school. He's actually represented his old classmates in court :lol: . He's always been great at sports, played goalie for Dublin Gaelic football team, a comparison in terms of how high up that is would be like playing goalie for Chelsea or Manchester United in the premiership. So naturally he expects me to be even greater as I have more opportunities when really I'm lazy, intelligent but not hardworking and not that great at sports other than Golf so naturally he gets pissed off somewhat at that as both sides of my family have a huge history in sports.

As far as I'm concerned you must have a serious lack of parenting and communication skills if you must hit someone much weaker than you to either gain respect or get your point across. That method also teaches that if you want something done then use violence, and where does that get us? Might as well beat your spouse if they do something out of line :roll:

Since the realm I roll on is still new enough there's a small pop and never anyone in BG's + it's hard to find Instance groups or decent PvE guilds. :|

It shouldn't be legal, it's morally questionable, and the practice should be seriously discouraged. But when it comes to prostitution, a lot of people don't care about legality, morality, or authority. May as well take the blow but minimise the damage. It really shouldnt be legal for a lot of reasons.I mean (im not 100% sure how this wors lol, not like I am involved any way in prostisution) the prostitute goes ALONE into the buyers house. There are instantly so many things that can go wrong, both ways. For the buyer, who knows lol, it could be a thief in disguise, but idk i dont think that s a real issue. It worse for the prostitute, they're at so much more risk. Who knows what sick mind the buyer might have, and how they could seriously take advantage of them with ease. Plus, the risk of STD's are in a way just too high. But legalizing it could eliminate many of those risks through strict laws, licensing and circumstances. Ie legalized licensed brothels which adhere to the laws / rules like in Nevada, where security is on hand for the prostitutes safety and condoms are mandatory for the clients / prostitutes safety. Outright legalization of on the street prostitution, definite no. Legalization of strictly controlled licensed brothels, maybe. Still as I said, you must be pretty socially unskilled if you must pay for sex.

If it's strictly controlled where only licensed brothels can run it I'd suppose it's not bad as long as condoms are worn and the clients aren't allowed to ejaculate within or on the prostitute then I wouldn't see much problems with it. As long as it's strictly controlled to stop the spread of dangerous STD's, prostitutes are checked every two months for STD's and keep clients on record so they can be informed if a STD is found to be had by a prostitute so they can get tested and if possible have it cured. Seriously though, you must be pretty lacking of social skills if you must pay a girl to get her into a bed.