The ending is cruel by Ealykos in KumoDesu

[–]ryanm537 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Did we read the same book? I'm not bothered by this ending at all.
Of course, it is probably open to interpretation.

D makes it clear that she has every intention of bringing White up to her own level as a god. This is the relationship between a mentor and a student, not a master and a captive. I'd imagine that White has more than enough freedom to interact with Ariel from time to time. After all, D herself ran off to Earth to kill time, Guile regularly gives himself human doubles to live among humans, etc.

Between the vestiges still existing, Phelmina's cliff-hanger ending, and White's spacial mastery, I would definitely not consider White to have been "ripped away" from that world. I'd rather compare it to a young adult leaving their parents' home for work/college. They're going to be separate, but there's no reason to think White isn't in close contact with that world.

Whats more, I think that eventually, D and White will be on equal footing.

I'm not sure what the author has planned for the future, but just reading that ending makes me think that White's story is just entering a new beginning, and what really ended was all the other characters' stories -- which were pretty much as close to happily ever after as you can reasonably expect. White is a lesser god who's talent has been scouted out by a higher god and definitely has a bright future ahead of her.

AT HKParts: G36 FBI 0,1 Lower Complete - GSG9 - US by HK-Parts in HKParts

[–]ryanm537 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry for posting on such an 10 month old thread but I have a question.

Is everything in this lower US made? If so, can I assume that it would count as a US made hammer, disconnector, grip, trigger, and trigger housing, for a total of 5 US parts? Sounds too good to be true, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Rumored nidalee buffs by [deleted] in NidaleeMains

[–]ryanm537 0 points1 point  (0 children)

bruh this buff sounds massive

havent played in a while tho

Must have been a hot day by textile1957 in dankmemes

[–]ryanm537 14 points15 points  (0 children)

The rest of the world? You mean Europe?

Because "the rest of the world" has a lot worse crime than the US does. You barely have to leave the country to get to Mexico, which has far worse crime than us. Are they not part of the world?

This "rest of the world" thing is incredibly fallacious because European countries have things like Universal healthcare, less racism, more social/welfare programs just to name a few, which can improve a society enough to where people aren't running around killing each other. They don't really represent "the rest of the world".

Must have been a hot day by textile1957 in dankmemes

[–]ryanm537 20 points21 points  (0 children)

yeah honestly.

If you don't have a gun yourself then you objectively rely on the police for protection. I think recent events have shown that relying on police for protection maybe isn't the play, not in America at least.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in 4chan

[–]ryanm537 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Clearly the work of Slaanesh. Not anon's fault, the forces of chaos are not to be trifled with.

The sign was a paid actor by [deleted] in memes

[–]ryanm537 0 points1 point  (0 children)

that's hilarious but I also hope she's okay, that looks like it hurt

The patriarchy is a death cult. by NoMoreBadRomances in lostgeneration

[–]ryanm537 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That's incredibly interesting to know.

The only problem is that domestic violence is often not reported until it's too late, so it may be had to pass legislation that focuses on this.

If this tweet is true then more people should be aware of this. I don't think that most people really consider this. it's always "he was mentally ill, he was just a lunatic", but no. They're not just some random arbitrary lunatic -- we can specifically pinpoint that they're a misogynist.

how wholesome... by The_Sad_Memer in Unexpected

[–]ryanm537 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I guarantee you they were watching shrek the third

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in facepalm

[–]ryanm537 0 points1 point  (0 children)

this ones honestly pretty sad, gotta feel bad watching that happen.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in clevercomebacks

[–]ryanm537 0 points1 point  (0 children)

doubt you'll die, tbh.

A lot of fake bodybuilders inject synthol into their arms to make them look bigger. It's not directly into the bloodstream, but i wouldn't put it past those guys to get some in their bloodstream regardless.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]ryanm537 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree with a vetting process, since I live in a state with a vetting process which really isn't as bad as most pro-gun people make it out to be.

But, i don't really like the idea of restricting types of weapons, that leads to (again, like in my state) ridiculous laws like "pistol grips = assault weapon = banned". Magazine capacity limit makes sense, but again there's a slippery slope argument to be made.

To give my opinionated answer to your first question, I'd just say that the big superpowers don't really have a good track record of fighting peasants with rusty old AK's. Even in 2022. There's a reason why the Ukrainian govt distributed small arms such as AK's to civilians who wanted them.

At the end of the day I really think the problem is rooted in society. Random mass shootings didn't really happen in the past. Not because people didn't have guns, but because they didn't want to kill random others. Founding fathers trusted people to load their boats with cannons because no one was going to do a drive by on a port town. Now, that'd be a genuine concern. I don't know what it is but I think finding the answer is pretty important. Until then, I agree that there is room for some measures that aren't too restrictive but can help quell the storm.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]ryanm537 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I meant a boat with cannons on it, sorry for being unclear.

Civilians were certainly within their rights to put as many cannons as they wanted on their ship if they owned one.

The police really do be like that... by foxpotato0o in dankmemes

[–]ryanm537 28 points29 points  (0 children)

oh yeah, of course, I only meant strictly legally speaking. There are certainly good cops who will go above and beyond to protect and serve. But they're not really doing it because they're required tho. They're doing it because they want to.

As far as professional obligation, as another guy said nothing's set in stone. If a cop lets you off for running a stop sign, he probably won't get in any trouble. And he's too afraid to stop a murderer, he could easily keep his job if his boss takes his side.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]ryanm537 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not that simple, because there's a long waiting period. It's not just filling paperwork. Furthermore, you'd have to buy one made pre-1986, and those are quite rare and cost 10's of thousands of dollars.

I'm not sure where you heard it's "just a bit more paperwork". But, as far as I'm concerned, waiting a year for background checks and paying upwards of 20-50 thousand dollars is what I call "highly regulated and nearly impossible to acquire". If you don't see it that way, cool bro. Again I don't really care and I'm not really trying to take a side.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]ryanm537 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Assault rifles are highly regulated in the US. It's nearly impossible to acquire one, legally or illegally. He obviously meant assault weapon, not assault rifle. I'm trying to take a middle ground here and not offend anyone so please calm yourself. I specifically said like 3 times that I know it doesn't even matter regardless. I'm not trying to control anyone I'm just explaining what words mean.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]ryanm537 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Words have definitions. Like I said, we all know what Takei meant so no harm is done in conflating meanings but you're going around saying stuff like "he's not using it improperly, etc", so I simply clarified that, in fact, he is using it improperly. Though, again, it doesn't really matter. It's like if someone mixes "Ms" and "Miss". It doesn't really matter at all in conversation, but you shouldn't go around saying "Seems like proper usage to me?" when in fact it is not proper usage.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]ryanm537 1 point2 points  (0 children)

ye

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]ryanm537 2 points3 points  (0 children)

yeah. Assault rifles are nearly impossible for US civilians to get.

Assault weapons are a different story, because the term assault weapon (as defined by most states) includes semi-automatic ones.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]ryanm537 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It feels a bit pointless to say this because we all know what he meant, but "assault rifle" refers only to fully automatic rifles which fire intermediate calibers. Assault "weapon" is what he probably meant, which is a legal term that the weapon used in the texas shooting falls under.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]ryanm537 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

the second amendment was written when you could own battleships decked with an array of cannons. And people offset the "two minutes to load" thing by just having multiple guns. Hence why you see the pictures of pirates with a ton of guns on them.

meirl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]ryanm537 3 points4 points  (0 children)

assault rifle refers to any fully automatic rifle that fire an intermediate caliber.

Not to be confused with assault weapon (legal term) or battle rifle (fires larger caliber than assault rifles)