Dodge44

6 years for me, I can't believe it's been that long. Though I don't stop around as much. haha

Originally posted by: Jnvlv247 I have a city that I have played for a long time and it is very developed. Now, when I click on it, I get to scroll around and do some stuff, then the game crashes and all I see is my desktop. I get maybe a minute or less in the city. I looked around and there is no file or downloaded lot that screws it up. All my other cities work perfectly fine and they have some of the same buildings. What can I do to check to see what the problem is? PS--I haven't checked it since doing some updates like the BAT update and the NAM 2009, etc Thanks quote> I had that problem once. I found out that it was the result of 2 mods conflicting with a building that I had in the city. I think it was the landmarks with jobs? Not sure though.

RIP Mr Heston, You will be missed.

That's ridiculous.

Originally posted by: mks24 Ah the second amendment, granting citizens in the United States the right to bear arms. A right to bear arms, ah so subtle, but still not the right to bear "firearms". The rights granted by the second amendment allow citizens not to carry guns but to form their own protection services ie:fire, police, ems and even a militia if applicable. It also ensures citizens the right to have the necessary tools to operate those services ie: guns, fire hoses ect... . People however assume that this automatically grants them the right to carry a firearm, and unfortunately this amendment does not guarantee that.quote> The definition of arms would be anything that a man wears for his defence, or takes in his hands, or uses in his anger, to cast at, or strike at another. source Most opponents of gun control concede that the Second Amendment certainly does not guarantee an individual's right to own bazookas, missiles or nuclear warheads. Yet these, like rifles, pistols,knives,swords, and even submachine guns, are arms.

And if not the National Guard is the militia; where are they?quote> Militia is commonly used today to refer to a military force composed of ordinary citizens to provide defense, emergency law enforcement, or paramilitary service, in times of emergency; without being paid a regular salary or committed to a fixed term of service. Thus we are the Militia.

Originally posted by: Duke87 Originally posted by: SkiGeekOriginally posted by: manticorefan Can anyone name something that has been successfully banned in the US?quote> I have been thinking about this question. The best I can come up with is Cuban cigars. Cuban cigars are banned here, not because they are cigars but because they are Cuban. Since other cigars are readily available, there isn't a big need to traffic in the Cuban ones. quote> I know someone who went to Canada, stocked up on Cubans, and sneaked them back into the US. Still, he was smoking them himself in his own home, not selling them or anything, and it was a unilateral effort- so it's not quite the same thing as there being a black market. The point does come out of this, though, that due to our large borders, we really can't effectively ban something so long as it is not also banned in Canada and Mexico, and those bans are both enforced. That's what I'd say is the single biggest reason why our bans on drugs don't work. People smuggle them in from Mexico, where there is a ban but it isn't really enforced. Canada already has a gun ban, so if nothing else, us banning them would drastically reduce the number of guns smuggled into Canada.... Mexico's still wide open, though, so it solves nothing for us. Not to mention there's still the matter of ports. Airplanes and airports are pretty secure (thank 9/11 for that), but seaports and container ships are rather vulnerable. Lots of stuff gets smuggled in that way, too. Still- the fact remains that given how common and accepted guns are in this country, and how many people there are who would rather take their gun and shoot people with it than give it up willingly, a gun ban simply isn't practical because implementing it isn't practical. It'd be too drastic a change, too suddenly. And, even if you could implement it, could you really effectively enforce it? It's doubtful. American culture and history is big on civil disobedience. After all, it was a big part of the civil rights movement, and other movements before it. If people disagree with a law, they simply won't follow it.... and that's considered acceptable by society. Hell, it's even encouraged. We look at it as standing up for your rights, not disobeying authority. Our philosophy has always been "government by the people, of the people, for the people". In other words, they only get to do things because we want them to. They're not the boss of us, we're the boss of them. If they displease us, we get to fire them from their jobs by not voting for them. So, naturally, no law can ever be effective so long as there is a significant portion of the population that disagrees with it. Gun bans have indeed worked in other pats of the world.... but they will not work in America since it's a completely different situation. A gun ban is a very square peg... and while Europe and whatnot may have plenty of nice square holes ready for it, America is a very round hole. It just won't fit, no matter how hard you try and shove it in. Does America have a problem with violence? Yes, definitely. Will attempting to ban guns solve that problem? No. And I daresay it will likely just make it worse. Like how if a parent tells a teenager they're not allowed to do something, they're just going to want to do it more- if the government bans something, people just want it more. Having something be forbidden fruit just makes it look that much tastier.quote> Very well spoken, you're dead on.

Originally posted by: hamsterTK Well here's my take on it: What does it mean? What does it not mean?quote> Ive always personally though that the 2nd am. was to be understood literally, in context to the time It was written. But in a more interpretive view, I think the public should have some right to personal self defense guaranteed to them. However, I do not know if guns must necessarily fit into that. Is banning guns a good idea? Would it work? Why or why not?quote> Well what kind of guns? I see no need to ban long guns that are typically used by ranchers or hunters to defend or hunt animals. Small handguns on the other hand need to be more heavily restricted or banned in some places. 9mm's I know are used in the vast majority of crime To sum it up I am pro gun control but being realistic I am skeptical about a total ban.quote> Okay let's say there is a ban on all handguns. How do you propose to enforce this new law? Do you amend the Constitution to allow the Government to search your home, person, or vehicle at any given time without a search warrant? >> > > A comparable rewording of the Second Amendment in today's syntax would read: "For a country to remain free it must be able to defend itself. The people's right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed so that they may be able to defend their country's freedom." Hence when Congress passes any gun control law it is limiting the ability of the country to remain free.

Originally posted by: GingerBlokey Yeah. Does this not tell you something about the need to ban guns. quote> If we were to ban guns tomorrow there would be illegal sales of more powerful firearms in every lace w:st="on">U.S.lace> city the very next day. Ban our guns? NEVER! >> > > We as Americans can walk down the street without a care in the world. If we are hiding something in our pocket the government cannot search us with out probable cause or reasonable suspicion. The same goes for a gun dealer with a trunk full of automatic weapons driving down the street. If somebody really wants a weapon that bad trust me they will get one.>> > > Take Prohibition in the 20’s for example. Remember the crime wave of that era? And do you remember who got rich from it?

Originally posted by: Joesocwork Originally posted by: krbe Originally posted by: beebs Originally posted by: JoesocworkActually I feel comforted. I try to stand close to police when I board. I also park close to lights.quote>Parking close to lights I can understand.. but I totally don't feel comfortable when there's a group of police in an area. I feel intimidated. Heck, even airport security intimidates me. Maybe I'm just an anomaly. quote> If several patrols are onboard trains, and there are no group of thugs around, it means that something might happen, which is far more scary than a group of police escorting violent neo-nazis home (then I can understand it). The only crime happening onboard the Metro/suburban trains are pickpocketing, and allocating loads of police to catch them would be counterproductive (so they're of course doing something else). And airport security; a couple of guys with pipebombs strapped around them would kill more in the line than crashing a plane. quote> Actually I do feel pretty safe on Metro. I presume the stats will back that up. Unfortunately there are still reports of crime in the neighborhoods nearby some of the station and I wish there was more of a police presence there. My other concern is that I suspect that the Washington, D.C. metro system, and I suspect any subway system -as Europe has discovered, could be a ready target for the next big terrorist attack. I hope the authorities are prepared and preparing. Originally posted by: hym The volume of law enforcement types in the US is intimidating for many foreigners. It seems at every turn there's someone with a gun and a badge. In Australia if you get pulled over by the police, it's common to get out of your car and go and speak to the cop face to face. You do that in the US and you'll get shot.quote> Exactly where is this? I know NYC favors a very visible police presence, but other than them, I've never come close to seeing officers everywhere. Also, about the getting out of the car thing. As I've understood it, the reason you don't get out of the car is because that is something that is largely only done by individuals who intend to get violent, so if you don't want to send the message that you might be looking to get violent, it's probably best not to follow the action.quote> I just want to know where the police are at when you need them when people act like maniacs on the highway. There is no excuse for the recklessness and disregard in such matters as speeding, DWI, obsessive lane changes, tailgating, and cutting people off. I don't know how many times I have hollered to myself wishing an officer was around when drivers commit an act of foolishness, sometimes right in front of me. People tend to behave when there is a Crown Vic around. quote> Speaking from experience, the police can't be everywhere at once. Traffic enforcement is a big part of the job but we also have to have to answer other calls for service. In my area we run non stop, sometimes I find it a blessing to just do traffic enforcement. I know that this may not have answered you’re question but I wanted to shed a little light in that direction.

Originally posted by: fukuda Originally posted by: DuskTrooper Agreed. We should start using the death sentence for more crimes, particularly child abuse/pedophilia, rape, aggravated assault that leads to mental and physical scarring, etc. Oh, and those who are a massive burden to society that have no chance of being "cured" by rehabilitation.quote> Nice, another step further away from civilization, oh and a pedophile is not always an abuser, as an heterosexual is not always a raper. Originally posted by: Dodge44 Personally we should stray away from reforming the inmates and just punish them. Most people know what happens in prison. The inmates have tv, games, phones, the can go to school for free, the have one of the best health care systems in the world (it's free). They break the law but it's the taxpayers who pay.quote> Typical stereotype here, oh yes, prison is a marvelous place, if you're a total masochist. Prison is not how sensationalist TV shows and tabloids show.quote> I worked in corrections for 3 years so trust me I should know. Also I don't consider torture gratifying as I was only stating my opinion.

Personally we should stray away from reforming the inmates and just punish them. Most people know what happens in prison. The inmates have tv, games, phones, the can go to school for free, the have one of the best health care systems in the world (it's free). They break the law but it's the taxpayers who pay.

Looks like you're working at it, good job!

Those are awsome! Just got me into playing the game again.