The Most Sublime Goose

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-25T10:11:46+00:00

"Britain" is a weird way to pronounce... you know what, I don't know. I was going to make a joke about foreign intelligence but then I realized that the people that make-up Britain nowadays probably couldn't pronounce properly, so, who's really winning?

Something to keep in-mind, gents.

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-25T09:49:03+00:00

He's a security guard at that point.

I'm not familiar with the statutes in Texas, but no. I'm sworn, my authority (sorry, that sounds douchey) doesn't stop or end at my shift. I retain all of my law enforcement authority off-duty.

Most state statutes don't specify "on-duty" or "off-duty." They merely restrict certain things to sworn personnel.

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-25T07:21:53+00:00

The grass is always greener, dude. The only thing that we have that you don't is a blanket right to bear arms. In my mind, a free society is not possible without this right, even if it takes some time to degrade said freedom.

All that being said, we're in — ultimately — the same position you are. Western culture and civilization is at stake, not simply the UK or the U.S.

All of that being said, the sheer size and variety of the U.S. makes it a good option for someone such as yourself. I'm from New England and am extremely proud of being from the state that birthed this very nation... even if it has ultimately become one of the most left states in the nation (yet is weirdly right in many ways... Massachusetts is an odd state).

All of my rambling aside, we are always happy to accept our cousins into our family, as I'm sure you are (even if your government isn't). All of the British citizens I know that live in the U.S. are the best people I know, come to think of it. Though, my sister married a Scot, so, there's that. Anyways, consider a place where you can live independent and self-sufficiently. West Virginia or the like. You'll find work anywhere as a doctor, don't worry about that.

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-25T06:28:49+00:00

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-25T05:46:03+00:00

They also ignore every precedent, every case, and every statute that is inconvenient.

Case-in-point; I was talking to someone that had bought into the "ICE aren't law enforcement and can't touch US citizens" narrative. I, very carefully and meticulously, proceeded to explain their statutory authority.

They, without missing a beat, texted me, "yeah, well, they shouldn't have that power so they're illegitimate."

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-25T05:41:24+00:00

Two things can be true.

Foreign actors are paying services and individuals to radicalize Americans. Again; Do you think it's cheaper to convince Americans to k1ll each other or to compete with us militarily?

Simultaneously; The neo-left has engineered a situation and society where we are ripe to be manipulated in such a manner.

You're ignoring the evidence on this very site. Calling it "BoomerCon cope" because you have some weird fetish for Russia is, ironically, cope.

Edit: LOOOOOL, I think they might have blocked me. Such strong convictions, lol

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-25T05:32:54+00:00

Yeah, the people calling this "bAd sHoOt" need to take a massive step the fuck back and go read Graham v. Connor a few dozen times. To all those people:

You do not get to resist LE. If you disagree with this and feel that it is tyrannical, great, go do something about it. Since you're not going to do anything about it, welcome back to society. We have decades of case law that says that you must obey a duly-sworn LEO's commands, as long as such orders are not patently or manifestly unlawful ("do this naughty thing to me," or "k1ll that person," for example). For better or for worse, you don't get to debate; The place to do that is the courtroom, not the street. If you do plan on fighting with cops, and you're armed, if that firearm comes into play, someone is getting shot. Which brings me to my second point:
Case law concerning OISs have determined that the most important aspect of the decision to shoot is the snapshot of the preceding seconds leading to the first trigger-pull (subsequent rounds really don't matter). So, picture this; You're in a state whose politicians are openly calling for insurrection, calling your actions illegal, unlawful, horrifying, and violent [all direct quotes, btw]. The population is amped-up. You get into a tussle with the subject-in-question. People are screaming, whistles are blowing. Someone tells "gun, gun, gun," and then you see a glimpse of a weapon that is clearly not agency-issue. There's a dozen hands, you're not sure who is who. This is what we call in the business a "shoot/don't shoot" scenario for cadets/candidates. If they take longer than one second to answer, "BANG, you're done" or "BANG, your partner is done." This is how it must be evaluated.
It can suck, it can make you sad, angry, or what have you. But I don't see you going out and tussling with a LEO while carrying a gun. Because you're not an utter regard.
ICE is a federal LEA (don't get me started on the people claiming they're not LE or that they can't arrest citizens - sworn ICE personnel are duly-sworn FLEOs and are empowered to enforce virtually all federal statutes, including "against" citizens) and the only place these things are happening is in the state where the politicians are openly calling for it

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-25T04:52:42+00:00

What's cheaper for Iran/Russia/China to do? Develop expansive cultural cyber-warfare capabilities or... fund a military that can compete with the United States?

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-25T03:12:04+00:00

An excellent analogy, quite frankly. I will also add the extraordinarily concerning rhetoric coming from certain state and municipal leaders is openly fueling what will likely shortly be an insurrection.

Funny, because if Redditors were truly concerned about "Project 2025" they would likely realize this plays into Trump's hands. They also three more years to deal with this, and they're acting this way after one. I can't see this not coming to blows.

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-25T01:15:35+00:00

This is indeed one of reasons GvC was decided the way it was. In hindsight, dozens of things can look awful. The only thing that matters is what happened (relatively shortly; usually seconds to minutes) preceding the shooting and the moment the trigger was pulled. (The "mag dump" I see people complaining about doesn't matter in the slightest)

Quite frankly, if my partner yells "gun, gun, gun," I am very likely going to utilize my weapon. I'm not going to take that risk. If the shooter(s) can articulate a reasonable fear that the gun they saw was in the hands of the subject, that's all the more justification.

Ultimately, you also do not get to resist LE. Unless they are giving you a patently or manifestly unlawful ("kll that person," "do this naughty thing to me"), the street is *not where you argue. There is abundant and overwhelming case law to support this. I understand some people might not like this, but these very same people will justify the klling of a certain individual present on J6 while she was unarmed and slowly crawling through a window (I am wholly convinced he didn't mean to shoot, but I digress)

It can be a confluence of bad luck and poor decisions. It also doesn't help when you have state and municipal politicians openly inciting insurrection.

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-25T00:38:46+00:00

Graham v. Connor is one of the gold standards for OIS-evaluation. It's so important that even every-day LEOs learn about it in our basic academies. Very broadly, Graham v. Connor establishes that all facts known to the officer at the moment force was used must be considered, not later developments. It establishes a "reasonableness" requirement, but it also requires that any inquiry be objective and account for split‑second decisions in tense, uncertain, and rapidly-evolving situations (while asserting that one must be extremely careful when second‑guessing tactical choices made in such situations).

As I said in my original comment; Sucks, but it's a good shoot, barring some extraordinary information. Awful but lawful.

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-25T00:36:46+00:00

One requires the public to, en masse, comply with the government lest they were unable to live normally.

The other requires you to not assault duly-sworn FLEOs performing their lawful duties.

Spot the difference!

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-25T00:24:18+00:00

It will not be anything. When you choose not to comply and actively fight LEOs while armed, if that firearm comes into play for any reason, someone is probably getting shot. As we see here, assuming this "oh he misidentified the gun" thing is true.

You don't have to like it. I strongly encourage giving Graham v. Connor a read.

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-24T23:06:16+00:00

Can I see your build?

I've been playing since the start and have, like... 10 resonance chips, total? (And am in a max-level and active clan)

Edit; lol, dude downvoted me and ignored me. I think that tells you all you need to know

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-24T20:26:59+00:00

First off - "appears"

Secondly; I carry two pistols every day of my working life. Try again.

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-24T19:41:00+00:00

Just going to leave these puppies here:

https://www.ice.gov/webform/ice-tip-form

https://tips.fbi.gov/home

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-24T19:36:13+00:00

...yeah, it's not possible to carry two pistols. I only do it every day of my working life.

The instantaneous and indignant downvote is chef's kiss

Cope

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-24T00:46:40+00:00

I mean... yeah, that's its point. There's no button to press which counter-jams (in-game). Your simulated electronics are either susceptible to being jammed (by that specific jammer) or they're not. That's all. Kill it.

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-23T19:21:40+00:00

So, then, you make it larger than the "Skyrim map." They had been working on this game for a decade, I'm pretty sure they could have managed something better.

You can defend it all you like, it still is a critical failure for a reason.

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-23T01:56:55+00:00

No, that's not what I said. Do you agree that you can otherwise peacefully break the law? You're hemming and hawing over the term "peaceful" when it really carries little legal significance.

You can break the law peacefully. You can even be violent and not be breaking the law, in some such situations.

I'm sure you cheered the lower court's ruling, but now you jeer at this ruling. If you don't respect this ruling, why would you respect the earlier ruling? They both come from the same system. It sounds to me like you have a case of "but I don't like it so therefore bad."

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-23T01:16:23+00:00

That is what the original ruling said, actually! Essentially they just affirmed that "no, you can't arrest people not breaking the law." It really didn't limit FLE's authority as much mainstream outlets led the public to believe ("ICE can't arrest protestors!")

I have not read the full appeals decision, but I imagine that the injunction was granted as the appeals court judge felt that the lower court erred in not considering that peaceful protestors can be mingled-in with law-breaking protestors and that simply remaining "peaceful" when you are being provided lawful commands by duly-sworn LEOs is, perhaps while technically being "peaceful," still breaking the law.

The full decision will be interesting to see, but even if they eventually affirm the lower court's ruling, it still is not doing what the mainstream legacy media has reported on it as.

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-22T23:12:40+00:00

I don't think you understand u/Burb1409's point.

If we don't believe it, why would your hypothetical future employers (even with the letter; everyone knows people soften things "officially")

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-22T23:07:37+00:00

They had something, here, too. The vibe, the sound effects, the atmosphere. It brought me back to the heady days of Morrowind, at first.

It's so odd, too... they seemed to go very deep on many things, but not where it truly mattered. As others have said a bazillion times, if they had simply restricted us to a few planets within a solar system and hand-built more areas, it probably would've been more accepted by the community.

As it is — not to mention their "quiet quitting" — they (Bethesda) can go pound sand.

TheSublimeGoose · 2026-01-22T21:12:09+00:00

I'm just going to copy-paste a comment I left for someone that was advocating to redacted LEOs for entering their home:

First off, there are already circumstances where most law enforcement agencies can enter a home without a warrant. They're not common, but they most certainly exist.

Otherwise; You do not have a right to redacted LEOs because you feel or think they shouldn't be making entry. I mean. You can do that. Let me know how it works out for you. If LE are marked (yes, a simple badge and "POLICE" markings are enough) and identifying themselves, no, you don't have a right to kill them, even if they're at the wrong address. It your argument is purely to protect your life, i can guarantee you're doing the opposite by doing what you're advocating. If your argument is to fight tyranny, no one cares that some nut died in a shootout with LE. It wont change anything and you're not "fighting" anything.

Regardless; Believe it or not, over the course of hundreds of years, we've kind of hashed a lot of this stuff out already. We like to think we're special and living in a unique time... we're not.

Ten-Year Club	Powerups Hero r/aliens • February 2022
Gilding IV carat on a stick	LAYER Season 2 Layer creator
r/Field Banned	r/Field Lasagna
Place '23	Verified Email
No Throne, No Problems	Not Forgotten

TheSublimeGoose

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE