MikeGosot

@Legion_ said:

I certainly see the logic, and I would maybe agree with you, if I too lived in a black/white world. In Norway, we manage just fine. We have free speech, but we understand the responsibility behind that right.

Then, i think i might have misunderstood you. (Also, why you keep throwing the "black and white world" argument around without any explanation?)

@Legion_ said:

But this is going nowhere fast. You guys think it's okay for people to utter hateful and rascist messages, and even encourage people to kill others. I don't think that is cool. Honestly, I can't understand how people always defend the amendments. They were written ages ago. One would have to assume that we are more intelligent now, and that we live in a different world.

And i see you have misunderstood us. You see, i don't think it's okay to utter rascist and hateful messages. It offends me. But even if i don't agree with these messages, i will always defend the right of people to say them, because well, that's their right. And i never would encourage anyone to kill a person, nobody here said that because the very core of our argument dictates that you cannot infringe other peoples rights, specially the right to live and the right to say whatever you want. You see, you said your country managed to have free speech and understand the responsability behind it. If the people themselves have come to that point, then great. That's amazing. However, if the government starts saying what you or cannot say holding the banner of responsability, then for me, that's wrong.

@Legion_: Also, an important thing to notice is that you can't support free speech and think that people can't say certain things. If what you can or cannot say is regulated by the state, then it's not free speech.

You also said that you "find it hard to discuss with someone who believes their truth is better than others", when you refuse to read that person's arguments. Just try to put yourself in our place, try to understand the logic behind our arguments instead of simply dismissing them because you do not agree with them. If you believe that the feeling of safety is more important than free speech, fine, that's your opinion, but i would like to hear a logical argument about that, if you are willing to do that.

@Legion_ said:

@MikeGosot said:

@Legion_: Once again, why? If you state so much that you understand the importance of liberty and free speech, why are you willing to give that away?

I'm not saying I'm willing to give that up. What I am saying, once again, is that we have a responsibility. No, I don't think it's cool for people to say that all jews should be killed. You could argue that it is free speech, but when it infringes on other peoples right to safety, I don't appriciate that.

To be completely fair, just saying that does not infringe any right. Someone just said something. Big deal. The fact that it offends someone isn't enough reason to take way the right to say whatever you want. The only time government should have to take action is when said individual kills a jew, or plans to kill one. Besides, taking away the right of someone to say "All jews should be killed" does not mean said individual won't kill any jews.

@Legion_: Once again, why? If you state so much that you understand the importance of liberty and free speech, why are you willing to give that away?

....Did Jeff even said he was interested into this?

@Legion_: Why? This is not an attack or anything like that, it's a serious question. Why would "everyone" have a responsability? Why would the government have a responsability? Are you willing to give away the freedom of a parent to choose what his children can buy or not for security? Are you willing to give the government power enough to choose what you can or cannot consume?

@Legion_ said:

@Brodehouse said:

@Legion_ said:

If it's the second one, then so be it. We're not going to defend our hobby to the point where people have to die for our right to play COD, are we?

You don't understand what free speech and liberty actually means. As an adult, you have the right to do, say, view, hear, think WHATEVER YOU WANT bar actively injuring another person through your actions. Playing Call of Duty does not injure another person, thus is NONE OF THE GOVERNMENT'S BUSINESS.

I have full understanding of what free speech and liberty actually means. I also understand that we're not living in some utopian world. Our actions have consequences, and we have responsibility for those actions. I'm not saying that I think COD is the reason for anyone going crazy, but if there ever is conclusive studies that show otherwise, then we have a responsibility to stop that. Take extra notice of the word conclusive.

No, you don't. The only one who has a responsibility to stop what a children may or may not do/play/watch/read is their parents. Not the government. There's no government responsibility in this subject.

@Hizang: When you get better, please post more videos about your juggling, i'm curious about that. Please don't kill yourself, you're an entertaining guy, judging from your videos and threads and the world needs guys like you! Stay strong, duder.

@SagaciousJones said:

And since I've played the demo to see just how shallow the combat is (maybe it's impressive to people who play God of War or something), I've had pretty much every one of my biased expectations confirmed. Thanks Ninja Theory!

WTF is up with that comment.

No, no, no, fucking no, what the hell? That's not what a government should do, and people shouldn't let the government do this. There's no need to mess with what i play or watch, specially if you spend that much money. Use that money to focus in mental health services, or education, not in studies like that.

I seriously cannot believe that the nation who gave us the guy who said "anyone willing to give up freedom for security deserves neither" is actually willing to do exactly that.

@Brodehouse said:

And here is where an entire nation gives up their right to free speech with triumphant applause.

This guy knows what's up.