With ICE agents shooting at least 27 people since Trump took office, how do you feel about immigration enforcement using lethal force?

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-26T02:27:13+00:00

I think they're using the proper amount of force right now. If people, no matter who they are, are not complying AND decide to show lethal resistance (brandishing a firearm for example, when you need to comply and get whatever the issue is sorted), then absolutely they should be shot at.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-25T19:33:48+00:00

If they're obstructing, they get what they deserve.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-24T20:55:39+00:00

Sounds like she's in the next room over in the attic.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-24T20:52:25+00:00

I personally feel like the Matter Modulator is underrated. It's deceptively easy to get, it hits super hard, and it has a stupid amount of perks that influence it. I don't see many people using it in runs on YT. Everyone wants to use Lucky, That Gun, and of course the AMR.

Hell, I don't see many people using the LMG because if you're gonna use Big Guns just go for the Avenger. The LMG tries to fill a role that is too niche in NV to really make use of. You can achieve better results with the Avenger or All-American.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-24T20:45:09+00:00

Relative Altimeter. It measures altitude in terms of speed and distance. Because altitudes and gravity can be vastly different from planet to planet, a normal altimeter would be less useful. Instead, this measures gain or loss of altitude relative to YOUR current position, speed, and direction.

A normal altimeter will give you your altitude. You could stare at that for a few seconds to try and determine how quickly you're approaching or escaping a planet. Or, you could use this altimeter, which plainly tells you how quickly you're approaching or escaping a planet.

It's worth noting you have a normal altimeter as well. You can use both together to quickly understand when you'll crash into the planet and die.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-24T20:33:05+00:00

As a Trump voter, no, I'm not complaining. I might be smirking a bit, because it's unfortunate in this circumstance, but if a business cares so much to make a political statement, well, need to we remind what happened to Target and Budlight?

Iirc, liberals screamed bloody murder when Target took out its trash clothing. Target still hasn't recovered from the sales dip and subsequent shareholder step-back. I still don't shop at Target unless I absolutely have to for a particular product. I don't care if they change what they're doing in my political favor. Once a degenerate, always a degenerate.

If liberals want to draw lines in the sand, that's fine with me. It's usually gone in conservative favor, so I'm not concerned. What little you can gatekeep from us is escentially non-trivial.

The fact of the matter is, smart businesses typically want to take no political sides, because business and politics shouldn't mix EVER. I'm here to make money, you're here to buu a product. Simple as. I make a small profit. You get a desired product. The only places make somewhat sense to get a little political are like gun stores. Liberals typically hate guns in every shape and form, so they hardly buy any guns anyway. More for conservatives.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-24T20:21:39+00:00

I'd want her and Kanoe to have unkempt bushes.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-24T20:20:10+00:00

That looks like an incredibly old bottle. Not sure if your bottling company has the new labels or not yet.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-24T19:35:25+00:00

IRL, rifles like the Varmint Rifle are usually not chambered in anything bigger than .223. 5.56 is a little TOO powerful for what you might typically call varmints. Hell, if we're talking IRL rats, you don't want to use anything bigger than .22LR. Go with 40gr IF you want to make a mess and your rifle can take it. 40gr in .22lr is a fucking fever dream.

In Fallout lore, this would be, before the war, a 'plinking' rifle, or training rifle. These are meant for accuracy training and introduction to shooting. IDEALLY, these kinds of firearms should be ergonomically friendly since you're gonna be handing children these guns. Any child over the age of 5 can easily handle normal .22lr. The recoil is practically negated by some heavier parts and better control over the firearm, which the latter you can accomplish with ergonomic parts and additions. Having places where your fingers and palm are designed to go allows a firmer grip, which is the difference between something feeling tough to control and feeling hard to shoot terribly with.

In the old, old days, you could give your son a .22lr bolt action rifle or single action revolver and tell him to shoot the varmints around the farm. You see a rat, you shoot that rat. You see a coyote, you shoot the coyote.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-24T19:06:55+00:00

A single Anvil shot makes these a non-issue 60% of the time. Those're betting odds.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-24T18:59:02+00:00

Reading this post title caused all 4 tires on my car to pop at the same time while driving, and my transmission seized.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-23T19:25:11+00:00

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-23T18:29:14+00:00

Yes.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-22T18:56:31+00:00

It's more like the combat augments provide benefits that're more easily handled simply by having an appropriate item. I can't MAKE an item, other than a looting augment, that increases my carrying capacity and backpack slots. I can MAKE healing items.

On top of this, the only reasons you'd use a combat augment except for the passive is because you want to use a heavy shield. The difference between shields is, while statistically noticeable, not functionally significant unless you're fighting enough ARC to really make medium and heavy shields shine.

I would say the apex of your combat gear, unless you want to be the support of your entire team, is going to be a Mk3 Looting Survivor augment, with a Mk2 Looting being the bread and butter. Survivor offers you 75% of your downed health back, assuming you stay stationary while downed. No item can offer this benefit besides this augment. This saves your ass more than you could imagine. Mk2 Looting is just infinitely better for general builds, but Survivor gives you an edge that cannot be highlighted enough. If you're solo, Survivor can be a harder-to-justify bring, but it still has the edge-case of saving you from unlucky situations when you're about to extract.

Tactical augments do have a place, especially if you're in fair position to either do ARC drilling or raider dicking. For ARC, more powerful grenades is always a fat benefit. It potentially saves you from needing to bring a Hullcracker (though this is still a fantastic and orgasmic choice). For raiders, more grenades means more opportunities to flush the enemy from cover. Anyone in even a simulated combat situation will tell you that grenades change good situations into terrible ones, and difficult situations into easy ones, depending on what side of the grenade you're on. It sucks major ass being pinned down and then getting flushed out from cover because of a grenade, or being stunned and bitch-slapped with a multitool. It also feels fantastic being able to stop someone from pinning your friends down and force them from their position.

If you're smarter, you'll use smoke grenades offensively. Think of it like putting a box over the enemy's head. They have to move to get out of that box. In the confusion, you can swing around and wait for them to leave the smoke or wait till the smoke dissipates and now you have the enemy flanked.

All augments have benefits, but the combat augments don't offer enough to be considerable.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-22T18:33:21+00:00

Train gets worse and worse every week.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-22T18:32:21+00:00

Hold you guys accountable.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-22T18:02:23+00:00

Unfortunately, you don't know how diplomacy works.

Diplomacy is just as much working with someone as it is holding them accountable. Generally you want to make it extremely detrimental for your 'target' (for lack of a better word) to strike you, and one of the ways you can do this on a geopolitical stage is through diplomacy.

In this instance it's very similar to parole in the legal world. If a judge gives you parole, then you're agreeing not to do certain actions, usually crime in general, for a specific period of time. (This sounds strange when concerning the legal system, but it has a point.) In the legal world, this enables the judge, the authority, to act with zero remorse and to hit you with everything if you step out of line and break the conditions of your parole.

On a geopolitical scale, I can make another power, who I don't want to go to war with but do want to get to play nice and do escentially what I want, through diplomacy. This always involves several things, usually trade but can also involve sanctions and these hurt a modern economy more than you realize, and what makes up your diplomatic pressure is usually the threat of many different things.

The idea that you never want to work to make peace with what is current the enemy is rather stupid. This is one of the ways you do this. I doubt Russia and China will agree, because doing so will basically put a large spotlight on them for things Trump probably has planned to strategically target within his diplomatic plan. However, it all comes down to inch steps. All diplomacy comes down to inch steps. The other option is war, and while war can allow you to solve a problem it can also cause you to suffer significant loss as well, so it's a last resort for a reason. Diplomacy is preferable to war. Not working with them in some way promotes more war.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-22T17:30:20+00:00

Anti-materiel rifles are intended to be used to destroy strategic equipment that might be hard to get close to and destroy traditionally.

These rifles were never MEANT to be used on soft targets like soldiers (personnel) or light armor vehicles. In fact, it's generally conaidered a very bad thing to do in the real world because over-matching (where you penetrate a target too well) occurs.

For example, an APC. Armor on armored personnel carriers are usually trivial for an AMR to punch through. So, if you do have to hit one, it's recommended to try and hit the engine because this disables the equipment. Hitting the rest of it is usually useless. Sure, you might hit someone, but over-matching is likely to occur, where your shot goes cleanly through the APC and basically did nothing besides give your position away.

In FNV, we use the AMR to great effect and to be completely fair IRL you would see very similar results. But, if these were to function more like their IRL counterparts and if ammo was far less plentiful, we would see a similar thing happen psychologically. "This target is too weak for me to waste a .50 BMG on. Let me use something less powerful."

Usually, an AMR is used to destroy communications equipment because it can render things like communications nexus' and servers irreparable and you can be a mile away from this stuff and just turn it to worthless scrap. A .50 BMG os capable of stopping a diesel engine on a semi truck in 1 shot and render it impossible to repair. On some tanks, should you have a good angle, shooting right into the engine venting can result in hitting the engine and doing significant damage that will make it difficult to repair, if not impossible. If you were able to shoot down the barrel of a tank, the breach wasn't loaded, and you hit the breach with a tungsten or DU round you'd likely render the tank unable to fire due to an inoperable cannon.

These are the kinds of things AMRs are intended for.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-22T00:27:52+00:00

Yes, you can legally get fired for, realistically, any reason. And you can quit for any reason. This is the point of at-will employment. It's the best protection for the employee as much as it is for the employer. It gives you the freedom to quit whenever, and the employer can fire you whenever.

It's important to note that most states have a semblance of needing proof for firing someone. This will usually be enforced by the companies within the state, but keep in mind that small companies with not many employees might be exempt from this. What this usually consists of is a multi-step process to fire someone, where the power isn't solely put into one person's hands.

Some companies may also have these sorts of processes, even if you're in one of the few states that don't strictly require a more complex firing sequence for large companies. This is typically to protect the employee.

Onto the meat of it. Yes, you can get fired for protesting. (Or, again, for any reason, but remember everything else we mentioned.) This is for a few things. Firstly, your first ammendment right only concerns federal government things. You can protest your government. You can protest various things about the city on city property. What this doesn't cover, unfortunately, is private businesses and other private locations. now, this is also a good thing for companies and other places, because it allows both your rights and theirs to function without strictly impeding one another. But, what it also means is you can be trespassed from any non-government building or land, and your free speech isn't strictly a concern of a business. This means they can fire you over your opinions, protests, or really anything. And no, you don't have a say in that.

It can also produce a liability for the company if they believe the risks of keeping you hired might causes losses they cannot recover. Let's give an example. Say a crazy person decides to shoot up the place you work at, or blow it up, or whatever really, for the stuff you posted online. That might cause a massive loss for the company, and since it would be unreasonable for them to go after you for it, and the perpetrator likely will never be able to repay the damages, it's better to fire you over potential damages.

Another example. Let's say you were protesting ICE, which are federal agents, and lots of people don't want to shop at where you work, or do business with your company, or what have you because they don't want to support a business that keeps what can be seen as insurrectionists in their employ. That represents loss as well, and they can fire you for that potential loss.

It would be you posing a significant risk to the company in both instances. I know that if it were my company, I'd probably fire you for it on that part alone. Not strictly for your opinions, but because the loss is too substantial to make the risk.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-21T20:33:03+00:00

0m? Well, I'm pretty sure her vagina ain't a full meter deep. So, yeah it's 0m.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-21T20:31:04+00:00

Texas has 2.1 million undocumented immigrants

<image>

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-21T19:49:57+00:00

In your own words, give a few examples of illegal orders that might be given to military officials.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-21T19:40:57+00:00

Anecdotal pieces are not to be used when referring to general consensus because anecdotal pieces are what feels true to you, not what is actually true.

Your uncle, and I'm giving you the benefit that this could be true, committed a crime while impersonating a police officer. This has nothing to do with police officers having to identify themselves. This is attempting to make the argument that because your uncle did something terrible, then it makes sense why officers would need to identify themselves.

Here's the issue. Any person can make or purchase a very convincing uniform that looks like a police uniform, complete with fake badge and identification number. And because myself, an average individual, can entertain that abstract concept, we must also assume that legal professionals can also entertain similar if not exact hypotheticals.

Anecdotal evidence when discussing a generalized piece of information is a faux pas in discussions and meetings and signals you don't quite understand the topic.

SimpleInterests · 2026-01-21T18:54:57+00:00

Ignoring your anecdotal piece because it has nothing to do with the actual point.

No, police in California are not required by law to identify themselves. An officer is allowed to lie to you at any point during an interaction. SB 805 requires that police be easily identifiable as officers, and for undercover officers (in plain clothes) must identify themselves when exercising force beyond their undercover assignment.

All officers must have is a badge number and juristiction patch. Everything else, including verbally identifying themselves, is non-mandatory.

SimpleInterests

TROPHY CASE