I believe FNAF getting mega-popular was the precise moment when the scales tipped for me and I officially became old. I looked at it, and I decided that it’s just dumb and I can’t comprehend why the kids these days are so into it. I mean, I know the real draw is watching streamers or whoever freak out at all the jump scares and act ridiculous. But that’s a pastime that doesn’t appeal to me in any form whatsoever. Just, get that kind of thing off my lawn.
I did watch a ton of Game Theories videos, though.
I wanna point out, recognizing something isn’t for you doesn’t make you old. Your refusal to recognize it as something someone else enjoys is where that boomer mentality comes in. That’s just a theory, a BOOMER theory
On the flip side though they do generally have an average penis length of 6 ft so the joke can still work it just needs to be the penis instead of the balls
I’m doing a chronological rewatch of the whole franchise and am at the episodes where DS9 and Voyager overlap. It is mind boggling how much better DS9 is. I find myself wanting to skip almost every Voyager episode so I can just get to the DS9 ones.
Genocide requires intent. Whereas this alien just had a fleeting moment of anger at the time of his wife being murdered.
Can he really be tried for genocide? It’s hard to say, but I’d say not. We all have dark intrusive thoughts, and in this instance it had disastrous consequences.
It’s all moot anyway. If you have no means or intention to enforce a law, does it really exist?
The heat-of-passion is something to argue to mitigate culpability. Yes, he killed an entire species, and wasn’t exactly justified, but his emotions and passions were inflamed by the aliens murdering his wife making his actions involuntary.
Yeah but we aren’t talking heat-of-the-moment shoving someone into traffic during a bar fight, we’re talking heat-of-the-moment naughty thought during an aerial bombardment from a hostile force where his wife was killed.
In other words, does the word identify the cause, or the effect?
Can he really be tried for genocide? It’s hard to say, but I’d say not.
How so? The facts seem self-evident.
It’s all moot anyway. If you have no means or intention to enforce a law, does it really exist?
You can still classify someone though in such a way, in hopes that in some future time you can enforce the law on them, having being previously judged as a criminal.
i.imgur.com
Hot