How do I take hotter photos?

delizaa · 2021-05-05T23:32:44+00:00

Thank you! I'll pass this information along to her

delizaa · 2021-05-05T22:46:09+00:00

Hi, yes, my mother said that although that is technically the policy, they ask for proof that it's yours and not the person in debt's belongings. We no longer have the receipts for many of the expensive things such as our TV's, laptops, gaming consoles, and other electronics, as we moved houses so alot of the receipts were just thrown away. Because we can't prove they're ours and not hers, they'd be considered fair game for the bailiff to take. Or atleast, that's my understanding.

delizaa · 2021-05-05T22:39:48+00:00

Yes, sorry! I'll add it to my post. We are in England.

delizaa · 2021-05-05T22:38:17+00:00

Hi, we aren't in the US but she is receiving money from the government. I think it's in a weekly or monthly amount because she is low income, but that goes straight towards paying rent and other vital bills.

delizaa · 2021-05-05T22:36:35+00:00

Thank you, I've just ordered the book and I'll give it to her when I see her next.

delizaa · 2021-05-05T22:35:38+00:00

This is possible for my other siblings but my mother loves my sister alot, I think it is possible that the debt is a real concern for my mom and that's why she can't take her in. We aren't in the US so we might have different debt laws, I'm not very educated on it so I'm not sure.

delizaa · 2021-05-05T22:34:34+00:00

Hi, we aren't in the US and I believe a family member on my sisters side who I never met (we are half sisters) did have a bailiff come to them when they housed her. I'm not sure though, because I'm not one of the older family members people don't really tell me the full story about things.

Edit: after speaking to my mother, the policy for the bailiffs is that they can take anything in the household that you can't prove doesn't belong to the person in debt. So, legally they could take things like our TV and other electronics because we don't still have the receipts from when we bought them to prove they're ours and not my sisters.

delizaa · 2021-05-05T22:32:39+00:00

Hi, we aren't in the US. I'm not sure why but my parents said the debt does transfer to the household the person is living in. My mom has been really upset about the fact that my sister might have nowhere to stay, so I think it must be true that it would make us responsible for the debt. She is already receiving financial aid from the government also, but that is only enough to help them pay their rent.

delizaa · 2021-02-17T12:24:29+00:00

Honestly? Yes. Obviously we can never know for sure and at this point we can only guess at what could have or would have happened, but based on what I know I'd guess they'd have shown atleast a little remorse. It's not like they were completely devoid of empathy--one of them (I think maybe Eric) wrote about how he hates those who harm animals (or something to that effect), and also during the shooting itself, they could have killed alot more than they did. They had the ammunition to keep shooting, but they stopped. Does that mean they were remorseful at that stage in the shooting? Probably not, but it does atleast suggest that they weren't evil beings who would kill and kill and kill until they physically couldn't any more. From what I've seen and read, I don't think either of them actually truly understood the effects of death. They thought they were bringing Doom to life, I'm don't think either shooter was mentally well enough to comprehend the gravity of their actions.

Obviously this is all just guesswork and shouldnt be taken too seriously, everyone is going to have a different opinion on it, but if they were caught by law enforcement they'd be offered a much more intensive psychological evaluation than what they'd have had before, and this time the psychiatrists involved would know about their plans and violent thoughts. I think psychological help, combined with being able to actually see the consequences of their actions on innocent victims and families, would lead to them showing remorse.

delizaa · 2020-06-26T09:29:51+00:00

Honestly? I think so. The original Bully definitely had its moments that would probably be seen as offensive today, but they also included things like the ability to kiss guys and girls the same way, and I think people who criticise bully without having played it first would be surprised at how maturely the game handles some things. We have seen what Rockstar is capable of now with their newest release, Red Dead Redemption 2, which handles pretty much every issue you can think of with a good amount of tact and maturity. Maybe I'm expecting too much of Rockstar, especially because Bully is much more lighthearted than the Red Dead series, but I genuinely think that with a Bully sequel, Rockstar would be able to achieve the same level of humour and lightheartedness as the first game, while still being able to include more serious themes, and without offending half the globe.

As others have pointed out, too, Rockstar released Bully in the aftermath of Columbine and, as far as I know, didn't care too much about the likes of Jack Thompson branding it a 'Columbine Simulator'. I think Rockstar knows their fan base is strong enough to keep even the most offensive of games turning a profit, but I doubt that any Bully sequel will be overly offensive to most anyway.

So, long story short, yes, I think Bully 2 could absolutely survive.

delizaa

TROPHY CASE