TruthTellah's forum posts

#1 Edited by TruthTellah (8527 posts) -

@linus_south: I understand that you were frustrated with it, but you were kind of a jerk. Not cool, duder. Just take a breather. This may not be a great policy, but it has been their policy. And that person didn't have anything to do with deciding what it was.

#2 Posted by TruthTellah (8527 posts) -

It's beautiful...

#3 Posted by TruthTellah (8527 posts) -

@truthtellah said:

@brodehouse said:

You and I and everyone else do not exist for the purposes, interests or pleasure of our governments, the governments exist for our purposes, interests and pleasure. I've noticed more and more as the years go on, people refer to the government as having its own interests that run contradictory to the interests of the people. At that point, why not just call them the nobility and forget about this whole representative republican thing?

Like all irrational, overbearing, grasping government decrees, this will either be completely ignored by the populace, who will continue to act in now illegal ways to the point where the rare times when people actually get arrested will seem completely arbitrary. Or, people will get angry and simply go elsewhere. All they've managed to do is turn a simple tattoo down at a parlor to a plane ticket. Hope they like all that American money being spent abroad to escape their odious regulations and taxes. Never could have imagined it would go down this way.

I'm referring to a manner of design, not just arbitrary desires of those who happen to be in the government. I'm saying, as far as having a government goes, it makes sense for that government to regulate procedures done on people. That isn't strange; that's just the reality of having a government. I want the government to be interested in regulating procedures, whether done in a hospital or in a parlor. Making sure people are licensed to perform procedures is good, and making sure people can't just do whatever they want to someone else is good, as well.

I don't think this particular vague bill is a good idea, but I'm responding to the suggestion that this is only a personal decision when it is a decision involving someone else doing something to you. The government(as in, as designed and supported by the people) should regulate procedures done on people. We can disagree with what regulations and restrictions they may choose to enact, but it's in our interests to have the government attempt to regulate procedures done on people.

What you're proposing here is precisely what malpractice suits are for. If the care a doctor provides a patient falls below the standards agreed upon in a voluntary contract, then the patient has every right to file a malpractice suit. But instituting regulations on these "what ifs," before malpractice even occurs, is just making things more difficult and expensive for both contract-abiding doctors, and patients who want some specific procedure (but may now have to buy a plane ticket, book hotel reservations, etc. to have it). It's a bunch of unnecessary, further-government-empowering nonsense (because you can't just pass a new regulation without hiring people to enforce it, meaning more money spent by gov't, and more taxation) for contractual standards that already exist.

I'm not proposing anything. I'm explaining why regulation as a concept is a good thing. The government should attempt to protect people from dangerous foods, dangerous products, and potentially dangerous procedures. There are a lot of bad regulations, and it's important to strike and maintain a good balance with regulations.

It's nothing new that some medical procedures can't be performed by a licensed physician, or that tattoo artists can't just do anything they want to someone. This isn't a proposal; this is the reality of how things are. And even with serious issues in government regulations, it's good that some things are allowed and some are not.

In this case, I think it seems like a bad bill, and I hope it is either greatly changed or never passed.

#4 Edited by TruthTellah (8527 posts) -

Jie-ant Bah-m.

#5 Edited by TruthTellah (8527 posts) -

@truthtellah: It was apparently originally planned to be called Into the nether regions.

Oh yeah? Okay, that would make more sense.

#6 Posted by TruthTellah (8527 posts) -

Wait, what's the slightly suggestive pun to this title? Into the Nexus? Is there some slang I'm not familiar with? Like, "Bro, I went into the nexus last night, if you know what I mean"?

I thought all Ratchet & Clank games were supposed to have kind of double-meaning titles...

#7 Edited by TruthTellah (8527 posts) -

@canteu said:

Who knew this site was filled with misanthropes who hate fun?

To be fair, this is Giant Bomb. The site and its community are not really something any of us can ever fully understand.

#8 Edited by TruthTellah (8527 posts) -

I'm glad you've been able to find ways to cope. Psychosis is varied and difficult. If you can exert the control you need, that's great.

I only have sad stories when it comes to people I have known with psychological disorders. I lost a friend to multiple personality disorder, and over the years, I've seen too many be tortured by their own minds.

#9 Posted by TruthTellah (8527 posts) -

@juzie said:

@truthtellah said:

@juzie said:

@joeyravn said:

@pabsi9 said:

yes and patricks going to be on them....also on the xbox one 2

Xbox One 2 confirmed via leak by anonymous Giant Bomb user.

You didn't know about the Xbox One 2 yet? Comes out this month!

Personally, I'm holding out for the Xbox One 2 3, Beginner's Math Edition.

Technically, it would be the Xbox One 2 2

No, no, that's a different one. Though, hey, the Xbox One 2+2=Fun! Edition -is- pretty cool.

#10 Edited by TruthTellah (8527 posts) -

@juzie said:

@joeyravn said:

@pabsi9 said:

yes and patricks going to be on them....also on the xbox one 2

Xbox One 2 confirmed via leak by anonymous Giant Bomb user.

You didn't know about the Xbox One 2 yet? Comes out this month!

Personally, I'm holding out for the Xbox One 2 3, Beginner's Math Edition.