The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Stand your Ground was a law supported by the gun lobby so I guess not?
Ok, that makes sense - unarmed people that get killed by guns are actually commiting a crime and should be jailed for that - I mean thay are after all a danger to society.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
It's never illegal to approach someone you think is suspicious and ask what they're doing there.
If you're going to say that getting our of your car and chasing some kid through the night with a gun in your pocket constitutes asking him what he's doing, then I'm going to say the kid running away from you constitutes him saying '**** off, none of your business,' thus ending the inquiry.
"In the beginning was the Word. Then came the ******* word processor." -Dan Simmons, Hyperion
I really hope they go through with the civil lawsuit. Watching the prosecution self destruct like this was really entertaining, and it'd be fun to see a repeat. What preponderance of evidence is there that this wasn't self defense? The back of his head was injured so severely the examiners said he was probably being pummeled...a prosecution witness identified Zimmerman on the bottom...
I've seen a lot of trainwrecks, but this prosecution was so mentally unhinged it was really entertaining.
Keep in mind Zimmerman can sue too. I hope he takes down NBC, and NAACP for accusing him of killing Trayvon in "cold blood" last night.
Being honest what probably happened is Zimmerman said don't move, I have a gun and Trayvon attacked. Fortunately that is not enough to get a conviction under federal or state law, and almost certainly no civil damages.
Regarding civil damages, if Zimmerman is smart he'll have basically no money left having spent it on stuff, moved what he can to be in his wife's sole name and just declare bankruptcy to make him judgement proof in a civil case.
If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers? ){ :|:& };:
Regarding civil damages, if Zimmerman is smart he'll have basically no money left having spent it on stuff, moved what he can to be in his wife's sole name and just declare bankruptcy to make him judgement proof in a civil case.
yeah, but i'm pretty sure that zimmerman isn't smart. hopefully his attorneys mentioned that to him though.
Being honest what probably happened is Zimmerman said don't move, I have a gun
Is that what american freedom means ? Nice.
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
All this means is in Florida, and likely other states with NRA controlled state governments, you can now pick a fight with someone and execute them when ever you want. All you have to do is say you felt threatened and feared he'd get your gun (which he couldn't see and never even knew was there) and you get a free pass on your murdering ways.
if you were straddling someone for up to a minute you'd feel the bulge of a gun on their hip
and Martin picked the fight, he watched Zimmerman walk by him twice and ambushed him the 2nd time as he was walking back to his truck
Not in Florida, dip****. In fact, that preponderance of evidence standard is only in effect in Ohio.
The Zimmerman jury didn't need to find preponderance of evidence that Zimmerman acted in self defense. Once the defense suggested some the judge reasonable evidence for self defense (which they did), the jury had a much different standard - they had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it wasn't self defense. Much easier for the defense. Florida
Do you mind providing some backup for this? May be true, but is different from my understanding of how things work in most common law jurisdictions.
The tragic death of Trayvon Martin has led to more discussion of self-defense and the “duty to retreat.” I wanted to offer a few thoughts about the broad issues. 1. The costs of the legal acceptance of lethal self-defense: To begin with, I think both self-defense enthusiasts and self-defense skeptics have to acknowledge that the […]
b. Allowing convictions unless the defendant proves self-defense by a preponderance of the evidence: This appears to be the old common-law rule: While a murder defendant’s identity, intentional action, and the like have to be proven by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt, the affirmative defense of self-defense has to be proven by the defense by a preponderance of the evidence. If the jury thinks that, say, there’s a 40% chance that the defendant is telling the truth when he says he heard the victim threaten to kill, and reach for his waistband, then the defendant would be convicted of murder (or manslaughter, if that’s what he’s charged with).
This approach was upheld as constitutional in Martin v. Ohio (1987), but is now the law in only one state, Ohio. In all other states, once the defense introduces some evidence of self-defense, the prosecution must rebut that with proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If the jury thinks there’s a 40% chance that the defendant is telling the truth when he says he heard the victim threaten to kill, and reach for his waistband, then the defendant would be acquitted. The theory that “better that [say] 10 guilty men go free than one innocent man be convicted” extends to self-defense claims: “Better that 10 men who committed murder and lied about the need for self-defense go free than one man who killed in justifiable self-defense be convicted.” The worry about fake claims of self-defense has not been seen as serious enough to retain the old common-law/now just Ohio rule.
“I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
- John 13:34-35 (NRSV)
Anyways, I'm fairly liberal, but liberals have lost their freaking minds on this! From everything I've seen, the determination of self-defense was a pretty reasonable decision for the jury to make. Liberals trying to turn their into some racial thing are just making themselves look foolish.
“I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
- John 13:34-35 (NRSV)
...liberals have lost their freaking minds on this! From everything I've seen, the determination of self-defense was a pretty reasonable decision for the jury to make. Liberals trying to turn their into some racial thing are just making themselves look foolish.
I agree.
It's unseemly.
Apolyton's Grim Reaper2008, 2010 & 2011 RIP lest we forget... SG (2) and LaFayette -- Civ2 Succession Games Brothers-in-Arms
Tweet
){ :|:& };:
Comment