Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Corruption is rarer than you seem to think.

Your canadian, you come from a nation of low population with more equal distribution of wealth. I'm from America and corruption is at an all time high. The drug trade is practicly run by law enforcement, whever cops talk about how they need the drug war to "control things" their talking about making the gangs give them payoffs. In case you think i'm making this up i've talked to people who've told me about drug dealing cop reletives of theirs, i've also talked to honest cops who've told me cops these days are getting more and more crooked.

This is a communist cartoon from the 20's and although i'm not communist I think it shows the problem pretty well


Maybe we the Night Haunter

Justicar_Thunderflanks wrote:The Tau are reliant on an Aristocracy of Orwellian proportions led by a ruling caste which condemns the creative mind.

I agree with your other summaries, but I think this one more accurately describes the imperium. "An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded" as the imperial saying goes.

The Tau have advanced so quickly through lack of corruption and encouragement of creativity. The Ethereals may have loyalty-inducing pheromones, but even when not in their presence the Tau genuinely love their leaders and honor their wisdom and experience with reverence. As a race they're remarkably unified, organized and forward thinking. The only known exception to their unity is Commander Farsight, who is still loyal to the Tau race.

I would say the dark side of the Tau is their 'Our way is the only right way. Join us or die' mentality.

On topic: Personally I've always felt that Space Wolves are the most thoughtless and chaotic of the SM chapters. Thinking that they're better than the other chapters just because they don't care about rules.

felt that Space Wolves are the most thoughtless and chaotic of

Russ only attacked magnus after magnus told him to go to AA

ZSO SAHALL wrote:suggesting some d

Do you truly believe I care what happens to any of you after my death?

The night haunter said and did conflicting things at the time of his death.

suggesting some deep sickness within... his cadaverous visage ...

Their have been hints in several books that something was physically wrong with him, like somehow the emps genes had not settled right in him and he was dying. If so that explains some of his self-destructive behavior.

You also have to take into to account whose saying what. Talos is meant to represent both the present legion as well the melancholy of the Legion, and is even rebuked by others who say "he wanted us to survive the long war" "your not the only one he confided in". Sahaal is his hope, his hope against all odds of winning and creating something better for humanity "and the Imperium will prosper under nocturnal eyes. Most likely he said different things to different captains who connected to him on different levels.
Regardless of what he said to Talos Curze enjoyed far more dedication from his sons that Horus whose legion came to despise him.

They chastised him because he was the only one in the Legion who still talked of the Primarch's memory and their better "more honorable, more glorious" days. The rest of the Legion was having way too much fun getting possessed and pillaging random backwater planets, and generally acting like the Chaos Marines they now are. Talos' visions were the only reason he was tolerated enough by the Exalted to let live.

"Sahaal is his hope"? Get real. If that's the case, his hope was misplaced, since the Talonmaster was both a traitor and a coward, who snatched up pieces of his father's gear and fled the planet before the other captains could swarm him for his prize. His claim was no stronger than that of anyone else, which is shown when Abaddon offers Talos leadership of the Night Lords, and Talos laughs at the impossibility of bringing his shattered Legion together under one man. Whatever was wrong with him, Kurze was a deranged lunatic at the head of a Legion of murderers and madmen. Any attempt to allot him noble qualities is misplaced.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:

I can see you're not an essay writer, as you didn't explain what makes you feel that way.

Punitive and retributive, yes, and there's nothing wrong with that. Arbitrary? Hardly.

Arbitrary: Based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.

A judge can choose to throw the book at you, or give you the minimum sentence. Depending on the crime, this can be time served or a 60 year sentence. That's a pretty big difference and it's up to the judges 'personal whim' rather frequently.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
You think laws are just randomly passed for no purpose? A code of laws is needfully specific, having it simplified down to "Don't kill, Don't steal, Don't hit, Don't rape" just doesn't work. Every law passed is thoroughly thought out and voted on.

No, they generally have a purpose: They're thought out by the rich and powerful, voted on by the rich and powerful, and are structured so that the rich and powerful remain so. Any laws passed to the benefit of the common man is almost purely coincidental, or done to legitimize the government's position or re-enforce the public image the government is trying to project.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Is rape "sometimes" okay where you live?

Rape I'm unsure of, but Robbery, Assault and Murder, yes.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
In-proportionate. Are you saying criminals should spend the weekend in jail for genocide orrrr...? Or are you saying it is too light?

'Repeat offenders' can face a mandatory life sentence in some places for shoplifting a loaf of bread. But if you steal 500 million dollars once, you face a max of 20 years.

And if you don't believe me, here's what Judge Otis D. Wright II said in the recent case of Nexon America Inc. v. Kumar:

"...even the minimum statutory amount awardable under the DMCA in this case [is] a significant windfall to Plaintiff far in excess of any amount necessary to deter future infringing conduct. Further, the minimum award here likely bears little plausible relationship to Plaintiff's actual damages."

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Corruption is rarer than you seem to think. Very few police officers are ever corrupted. Especially not individuals. You usually see this happen with entire precincts, and there is nothing subtle about it.

Why corrupt police officers when you can corrupt judges and the politicians that make the rules in the first place? A single crooked beat cop is a waste of money. A crooked department is about break even. An entire crooked political structure from the chief of police all the way to the Congressman? As the man once said: That's fething golden.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
The wealthy and influential are brought down harder than anyone. Have you seen the stories in the news about the British man being put on trial for accusations of manipulating prime ministers? Forget the name. Anyways, when rich people are brought down, they really are put to ruin. Even on the occasion they escape conviction with a team of crack lawyers, they are brought down twice as hard by the condemning media and the people.

You obviously have not been paying much attention then to the Murdoch trial then, have you (BTW: he's Australian, not English). Further, please point me to (other than OJ Simpson) a member of the wealthy and powerful who got off and failed to remain wealthy and powerful. The majority of the time, they keep right on going.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
And WHEN has a major government ever changed the laws to protect themselves? Especially on the personal basis you seem to be hinting at.

The US Government has a law on the books that they can't be sued unless they permit it.

However, what I said was 'to get their way'. The US, in particular, has quite a long history of this.

For example, international treaties have the force of law in the US, as long as approved by Congress. Let's put the put the breaking of one TO MUSIC!

HIT IT Mr Cash!

Rape I'm unsure of, but Robbery, Assault and Murder, yes.

I put crimes into different catagories, you have deviant crimes such as rape and murder, crimes in which the offender should just get a bullet in the back of the head. Then you have money crimes like selling drugs. Money crimes are caused by currupt system that allows drugs into the system, makes money off of the trade, and then sends people to prison for possesion. People guiltty of using or selling drugs should be reformed because they can be reformed. On the other hand murderers and sex offenders have gone too far to ever come back and should just be executed for the collective good. Anyone who has ever been around real evil knows the truth of my words.

However, what I said was 'to get their way'. The US, in particular, has quite a long history of this.

The only "good guys" are a few Space Marine Chapters like the Ultramarines and Salamanders. As for the Space Wolves they don't keep their planet a feral savages they just don't anything to help them. In combat they do fight with honour and try to protect civilians so I say they're pretty "good" too.

Crossed wires, we're all good.

As you were.

BaronIveagh wrote:

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:

I can see you're not an essay writer, as you didn't explain what makes you feel that way.

Punitive and retributive, yes, and there's nothing wrong with that. Arbitrary? Hardly.

Arbitrary: Based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.

A judge can choose to throw the book at you, or give you the minimum sentence. Depending on the crime, this can be time served or a 60 year sentence. That's a pretty big difference and it's up to the judges 'personal whim' rather frequently.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
You think laws are just randomly passed for no purpose? A code of laws is needfully specific, having it simplified down to "Don't kill, Don't steal, Don't hit, Don't rape" just doesn't work. Every law passed is thoroughly thought out and voted on.

No, they generally have a purpose: They're thought out by the rich and powerful, voted on by the rich and powerful, and are structured so that the rich and powerful remain so. Any laws passed to the benefit of the common man is almost purely coincidental, or done to legitimize the government's position or re-enforce the public image the government is trying to project.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Is rape "sometimes" okay where you live?

Rape I'm unsure of, but Robbery, Assault and Murder, yes.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
In-proportionate. Are you saying criminals should spend the weekend in jail for genocide orrrr...? Or are you saying it is too light?

'Repeat offenders' can face a mandatory life sentence in some places for shoplifting a loaf of bread. But if you steal 500 million dollars once, you face a max of 20 years.

And if you don't believe me, here's what Judge Otis D. Wright II said in the recent case of Nexon America Inc. v. Kumar:

"...even the minimum statutory amount awardable under the DMCA in this case [is] a significant windfall to Plaintiff far in excess of any amount necessary to deter future infringing conduct. Further, the minimum award here likely bears little plausible relationship to Plaintiff's actual damages."

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Corruption is rarer than you seem to think. Very few police officers are ever corrupted. Especially not individuals. You usually see this happen with entire precincts, and there is nothing subtle about it.

Why corrupt police officers when you can corrupt judges and the politicians that make the rules in the first place? A single crooked beat cop is a waste of money. A crooked department is about break even. An entire crooked political structure from the chief of police all the way to the Congressman? As the man once said: That's fething golden.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
The wealthy and influential are brought down harder than anyone. Have you seen the stories in the news about the British man being put on trial for accusations of manipulating prime ministers? Forget the name. Anyways, when rich people are brought down, they really are put to ruin. Even on the occasion they escape conviction with a team of crack lawyers, they are brought down twice as hard by the condemning media and the people.

You obviously have not been paying much attention then to the Murdoch trial then, have you (BTW: he's Australian, not English). Further, please point me to (other than OJ Simpson) a member of the wealthy and powerful who got off and failed to remain wealthy and powerful. The majority of the time, they keep right on going.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
And WHEN has a major government ever changed the laws to protect themselves? Especially on the personal basis you seem to be hinting at.

The US Government has a law on the books that they can't be sued unless they permit it.

However, what I said was 'to get their way'. The US, in particular, has quite a long history of this.

For example, international treaties have the force of law in the US, as long as approved by Congress. Let's put the put the breaking of one TO MUSIC!

HIT IT Mr Cash!

1. I bolded the area that doesn't make sense. Time served OR a 60 year imprisonment? Da fuq? Oh, and judges have much less power than you seem to think. They can't even pass judgement, that falls to the jury. There are minimum and maximum sentences for most major offenses. Unless you'd prefer we simply use an algorithm, which cannot possibly account for all possible factors?

2. That is simply the conservative ideal, not a generalized trait of all governements. Is Welfare for the rich and powerful? Unions? employment insurance? Free health care? No?

Also, politicians being rich is not something that happens in every human governement. In fact, in the time of CD Howe, all the ministers inferior to him were dollar-a-year-men, and not in the stock option kind of way...they were literally paid a dollar a year.

3. Robbery? No. Even police cannot enter your home unless invited or given a search warrant. Assault? You would no believe how specific and unrealistic the conditions for it being considered self-defense are. Murder? Same as assault, except even if you manage to convince the jury that a calm, rational human being in the sane situation would have done the same, your best home would be getting it reduced to manslaughter.

4. Minimum sentence is never life for shoplifting. even in California with the strike system, it isn't life, the third felony is 25 yrs.

5. Bernie Madoff

6. You miss the point. This man will, even if he escapes the trial, never lead a "normal" life again (quotation marks for fabulous wealth) when the press focuses negative attention on you, you are forced to behave extremely well. Imagine it is highschool, and you let rip a massive belch in class, right in the popular girl's face. You will eventually live it down, unless you do the same thing again tomorrow, in which case you should just move to a new school. Bad analogy but you get the point. Either way, it is irrelevant, as this was just the icing on the cake, the main punishment for the rich is when they go to prison

7. A lawsuit is a civil action...it is irrelevant. If the president shot a random old lady in the face...he would be made to answer. No individual, leader or no, has been free from judgement in any significant government since the Magna Carta.

War crimes are a different matter. It is simply not in the nature of any animal to not retaliate when pushed to extremes. If your enemy is using flamethrowers-a warcrime-you will be at a disadvantage unless you do so as well. Being at a disadvantage means your entire civilisation could be wiped from the earth.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

I put crimes into different catagories, you have deviant crimes such as rape and murder, crimes in which the offender should just get a bullet in the back of the head. Then you have money crimes like selling drugs. Money crimes are caused by currupt system that allows drugs into the system, makes money off of the trade, and then sends people to prison for possesion. People guiltty of using or selling drugs should be reformed because they can be reformed. On the other hand murderers and sex offenders have gone too far to ever come back and should just be executed for the collective good. Anyone who has ever been around real evil knows the truth of my words.

Evil does not exist. No one is like Cobra, where they simply want to destroy for the sake of their target being destroyed. The human mind is a complex thing. Anything you could even consider evil would be nothing but logical to the perpetrator.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
In fact, in the time of CD Howe, all the ministers inferior to him were dollar-a-year-men, and not in the stock option kind of way...they were literally paid a dollar a year.

I keep forgetting you are in Canada. I'm told that the 'service' part of civil service' still holds some water there. Give it time, it will rot like every other government does. Also explains why you keep coming back to the police.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Robbery? No. Even police cannot enter your home unless invited or given a search warrant.

In New York state, if you have a prior drug charge (not conviction, charge) if you are found in possession of more then $500 (IIRC) by the police it can be sized on the grounds that you were going to buy drugs with it. IF you work at a place of employment that is a front for organized crime, even if you had no knowledge of this, in theory everything you own can be seized by the US government, because you count as part of a criminal conspiracy.

If the government feels that the property you live on might be better used by Wal-Mart inc, your property can be seized under imminent domain laws and given to a developer to build a Wal-Mart.

"As through this world, you travel, you meet lots of funny men. Some will rob you with a six gun, some with a fountain pen."

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Assault? You would no believe how specific and unrealistic the conditions for it being considered self-defense are. Murder? Same as assault, except even if you manage to convince the jury that a calm, rational human being in the sane situation would have done the same, your best home would be getting it reduced to manslaughter.

In some states, I just have to feel threatened. It's called a Stand your Ground' law, and is currently the subject of some controversy.

Or I could join the police. There seems to be a very broad spectrum these days for what's 'justifiable' behind the Blue Shield.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
4. Minimum sentence is never life for shoplifting. even in California with the strike system, it isn't life, the third felony is 25 yrs.

Unless they softened it recently, the definition of a three strikes law is life without parole on the third felony. BTW: Yes, it can be. If a store sells stamps, and you shoplift there, they can nail you for robbing a post office, which is a felony.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
5. Bernie Madoff

Madoff was convicted of fraud, not theft. And he was convicted.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
6. You miss the point. This man will, even if he escapes the trial, never lead a "normal" life again (quotation marks for fabulous wealth) when the press focuses negative attention on you, you are forced to behave extremely well. Imagine it is highschool, and you let rip a massive belch in class, right in the popular girl's face. You will eventually live it down, unless you do the same thing again tomorrow, in which case you should just move to a new school. Bad analogy but you get the point. Either way, it is irrelevant, as this was just the icing on the cake, the main punishment for the rich is when they go to prison

I hold up Ted Kennedy as an example of you being wrong. Sure, the Media never forgot Chappaquiddick, but frankly, that proved barely a speed bump.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
If the president shot a random old lady in the face...he would be made to answer. No individual, leader or no, has been free from judgement in any significant government since the Magna Carta.

You forget the Reign of Henry the 8th or Robespierre or Stalin then. They were every bit as guilty of murder as men like Whitey Bulgar. You forget the US government deliberately exposing people to deadly diseases just to see what would happen and then men that came up with these experiments being rewarded rather then punished.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Evil does not exist. No one is like Cobra, where they simply want to destroy for the sake of their target being destroyed. The human mind is a complex thing. Anything you could even consider evil would be nothing but logical to the perpetrator.

Evil isn't just about destruction. What you are describing is obsession, which is a totally different thing. Evil is about not caring about what happens to others as long as you get what you want. Evil is destroying people's lives and not caring, spurning ethics and morality.

And there's a whole lot of that in existence.

Evil does not exist. No one is like Cobra, where they simply want to destroy for the sake of their target being destroyed. The human mind is a complex thing. Anything you could even consider evil would be nothing but logical to the perpetrator.

You really should read up on john gacey, then tell me if he was not evil. The reason we believe in evil is not because it exist, but because we need it to exist, man is fractious quarrel some creature far more defined by his hates than by his loves, your ideal is usually less about what you love and more about striving to be different than what you hate, its why we must choose our enemies wisely because they more than anything else define who we are.

Or I could join the police.

Or if your more of a sexual defiant you start a religion, like L ron Hubbard or David Koresh.

Space Wolves are too masculine to be concerned by our insignificant assessments! We are like effeminate insects to them! Flee, fools, lest your incessant feminine prattling draw their attention! You'll wish you had gone about your womanish work in silence then, I wager!

TheSovereign wrote:Space Wolves are too masculine to be concerned by our insignificant assessments! We are like effeminate insects to them! Flee, fools, lest your incessant feminine prattling draw their attention! You'll wish you had gone about your womanish work in silence then, I wager!

*TheBaron unsnaps the sheath on his power sword and daggers.*

The funny thing about fighters like space wolves is they have no finesse and understand only strength. Turn that strength against them, laddybuck, and their helpless as babes. Their joints, for example, still have those same weaknesses as men, even through power armor. Oh, and there's always the option of simply sinking the boat. It's hard to swim in power armor.l

the Talonmaster was both a traitor and a coward

I'm guessing you did'nt read Lord of the Night, were he was imprisoned by the Eldar for 10,000 years. His obsession with the corona nox stemed from the fact that it had the power to remove the taint of chaos from the Night Lords Legion.

BaronIveagh wrote:

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
In fact, in the time of CD Howe, all the ministers inferior to him were dollar-a-year-men, and not in the stock option kind of way...they were literally paid a dollar a year.

I keep forgetting you are in Canada. I'm told that the 'service' part of civil service' still holds some water there. Give it time, it will rot like every other government does. Also explains why you keep coming back to the police.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Robbery? No. Even police cannot enter your home unless invited or given a search warrant.

In New York state, if you have a prior drug charge (not conviction, charge) if you are found in possession of more then $500 (IIRC) by the police it can be sized on the grounds that you were going to buy drugs with it. IF you work at a place of employment that is a front for organized crime, even if you had no knowledge of this, in theory everything you own can be seized by the US government, because you count as part of a criminal conspiracy.

If the government feels that the property you live on might be better used by Wal-Mart inc, your property can be seized under imminent domain laws and given to a developer to build a Wal-Mart.

"As through this world, you travel, you meet lots of funny men. Some will rob you with a six gun, some with a fountain pen."

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Assault? You would no believe how specific and unrealistic the conditions for it being considered self-defense are. Murder? Same as assault, except even if you manage to convince the jury that a calm, rational human being in the sane situation would have done the same, your best home would be getting it reduced to manslaughter.

In some states, I just have to feel threatened. It's called a Stand your Ground' law, and is currently the subject of some controversy.

Or I could join the police. There seems to be a very broad spectrum these days for what's 'justifiable' behind the Blue Shield.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
4. Minimum sentence is never life for shoplifting. even in California with the strike system, it isn't life, the third felony is 25 yrs.

Unless they softened it recently, the definition of a three strikes law is life without parole on the third felony. BTW: Yes, it can be. If a store sells stamps, and you shoplift there, they can nail you for robbing a post office, which is a felony.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
5. Bernie Madoff

Madoff was convicted of fraud, not theft. And he was convicted.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
6. You miss the point. This man will, even if he escapes the trial, never lead a "normal" life again (quotation marks for fabulous wealth) when the press focuses negative attention on you, you are forced to behave extremely well. Imagine it is highschool, and you let rip a massive belch in class, right in the popular girl's face. You will eventually live it down, unless you do the same thing again tomorrow, in which case you should just move to a new school. Bad analogy but you get the point. Either way, it is irrelevant, as this was just the icing on the cake, the main punishment for the rich is when they go to prison

I hold up Ted Kennedy as an example of you being wrong. Sure, the Media never forgot Chappaquiddick, but frankly, that proved barely a speed bump.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
If the president shot a random old lady in the face...he would be made to answer. No individual, leader or no, has been free from judgement in any significant government since the Magna Carta.

You forget the Reign of Henry the 8th or Robespierre or Stalin then. They were every bit as guilty of murder as men like Whitey Bulgar. You forget the US government deliberately exposing people to deadly diseases just to see what would happen and then men that came up with these experiments being rewarded rather then punished.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Evil does not exist. No one is like Cobra, where they simply want to destroy for the sake of their target being destroyed. The human mind is a complex thing. Anything you could even consider evil would be nothing but logical to the perpetrator.

Evil isn't just about destruction. What you are describing is obsession, which is a totally different thing. Evil is about not caring about what happens to others as long as you get what you want. Evil is destroying people's lives and not caring, spurning ethics and morality.

And there's a whole lot of that in existence.

1. I thought you were being dramatic before. I KNOW you are being dramatic now.

2. Not sure I believe the part about that law. Can I get a link to some documentation? The part about the criminal conspiracy makes sense. Being associated with criminals, simply saying "oh, I didn't know he was a criminal" is a weak reply.

@ Property seizure, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2005/aug/04/20050804-120711-4571r/?page=all The problem is that in a system where the support of the people is what puts you in charge...they cannot come down too hard.

3. There are parameters for what is considered sufficient. Someone smashing down your door and waving a gun at your children, yes I can see how retaliation would only be natural. Feeling uneasy around a creepy guy on the bus, and he makes a sudden movement, so you shoot him? No.

4. It was never softened. 3rd strike=25 to life, with minimum sentencing being the common thing.

5. I didn't say he wasn't convicted. He is an example of a rich person being completely unable to dig his way out with his money.

6. AN EXAMPLE ZOMG...there are plenty of examples of guilty poor people not getting convicted...simply because they have to be 100% certain not to imprison innocent men, that creates certain exceptions where justice is not administered. It is not a broken legal system, it is a margin of error caused by a thorough dedication to fairness.

7.

Wikipedia: Maximilien Robespierre wrote:As a member of the Estates-General, of the Constituent Assembly and of the Jacobin Club, he defended the abolition of slavery and of the death penalty, he supported equality of rights, universal suffrage and the establishment of a republic. He opposed war with Austria

OMG HOW EVIL. Plus, how was he not made to answer? He was executed...also, he was "a capable articulator of the beliefs of the bourgeoisie (working man/middle class)" which is quite contrary to what you have said earlier this article in regards to the governement-people relation. Quite an odd example.

Henry the VIII...he wasn't a good leader, but is irrelevant to this point for two reasons.
A. He didn't brake any laws personally to veto answering to...no constitution.
B. He was a monarch, which is not the type of government about which we are arguing, since they do not have to answer to the people.

8. So now apathy is evil? Not caring is evil? It is evil to have priorities that do not consign to someone else's biased view of morality? No, evil is a conscient and deliberate wrongdoing, discrimination designed to harm others, humiliation of people designed to diminish their psychological well-being and dignity, destructiveness, motives of causing "unnecessary" pain or suffering, for selfish or malicious intentions and acts of unnecessary or indiscriminate violence. Basically going out of your way to hurt someone else simply for the sake of hurting someone else, not even for personal gain, but for the sake of suffering.

Apathy is the most neutral of things, it cannot ever be evil, good or anything else.

Anyways, good is both non-existant and childish. It is amongst the MOST childish things, in fact. The whole concept, the belief in something unfailingly evil...hogwash.

Evil, revenge, guaranteed fairness...all silly concepts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, having been in the police, I can tell you it is hardly a way to escape punishment.

Sure, out of respect a fellow officer may tear up a traffic ticket for you, but that's as far as it goes. The police have cast a very much inward eye, and punishment for errant officers is more than significant.

Only the RCMP get away with bull gak

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Also, having been in the police, I can tell you it is hardly a way to escape punishment.

Sure, out of respect a fellow officer may tear up a traffic ticket for you, but that's as far as it goes. The police have cast a very much inward eye, and punishment for errant officers is more than significant.

Only the RCMP get away with bull gak

Ah. My experience during my six year career busting politicians for corruption was that if you point to a random hole in the ground, you'll probably find where they tried to bury their vacation to Bermuda on the tax payers dime, their ties to a major corporation where they tried to bypass bribery laws by having a family member receive the 'gift' or some other compensation, or their ties to organized crime.

Granted, at the time I lived near Youngstown, OH. (Yes, that one, the one they call Y-town, 'Yompton' or 'Murdertown USA', Mob Town, and home of the 'Youngstown tune up' [aka a car bomb]. You know, where you can show an actual video on TV of the incumbent taking a bribe from the Mob and have him win anyway. [this was for Sheriff, btw] I think you might see where my cynicism about politicians and police comes from..)

On the three strikes thing: you're overlooking that even at the minimum sentence you're likely looking at 50-75 years because of the way it's structured. Remember that if they can dream up two charges, you have to serve those sentences consecutive.

BaronIveagh wrote:

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Also, having been in the police, I can tell you it is hardly a way to escape punishment.

Sure, out of respect a fellow officer may tear up a traffic ticket for you, but that's as far as it goes. The police have cast a very much inward eye, and punishment for errant officers is more than significant.

Only the RCMP get away with bull gak

Ah. My experience during my six year career busting politicians for corruption was that if you point to a random hole in the ground, you'll probably find where they tried to bury their vacation to Bermuda on the tax payers dime, their ties to a major corporation where they tried to bypass bribery laws by having a family member receive the 'gift' or some other compensation, or their ties to organized crime.

Granted, at the time I lived near Youngstown, OH. (Yes, that one, the one they call Y-town, 'Yompton' or 'Murdertown USA', Mob Town, and home of the 'Youngstown tune up' [aka a car bomb]. You know, where you can show an actual video on TV of the incumbent taking a bribe from the Mob and have him win anyway. [this was for Sheriff, btw] I think you might see where my cynicism about politicians and police comes from..)

On the three strikes thing: you're overlooking that even at the minimum sentence you're likely looking at 50-75 years because of the way it's structured. Remember that if they can dream up two charges, you have to serve those sentences consecutive.

No, it's 25 as a minimum. If you're busted for three felonies at the same time (in which case you're fethed in any court system) the minimum is 25. That's how it works.

I personally hate the SW, i dont really like the vikings and wolves in space deal, and find them to be very hipocritical. so i would not agree that they are "good guys"

Sure, out of respect a fellow officer may tear up a traffic ticket for you, but that's as far as it goes. The police have cast a very much inward eye, and punishment for errant officers is more than significant.

In the US we have problems with cops selling drugs and torturing people, stop talking about canada, your the only one here from disneyland.

ZSO SAHALL wrote:

Sure, out of respect a fellow officer may tear up a traffic ticket for you, but that's as far as it goes. The police have cast a very much inward eye, and punishment for errant officers is more than significant.

In the US we have problems with cops selling drugs and torturing people, stop talking about canada, your the only one here from disneyland.

I'm talking about the US also, and mostly.

There are cops selling drugs, but that is on an individual basis, and it would be quite odd if it weren't so considering NYC alone has 50,000 police officers.

Torture is a military act, not a police thing. Also, surprisingly, Canada (just a few months ago) legalized torture as a military means for obtaining information from non-Canadian persons.

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
No, it's 25 as a minimum. If you're busted for three felonies at the same time (in which case you're fethed in any court system) the minimum is 25. That's how it works.

Not here. California's Three Strikes law is 25 years per felony, to be served consecutively. So 25 + 25 + 25 = 75 years. I went and double checked this, since you were insisting that it was usually the minimum sentence yet I know over 4,000 people are currently doing a lot of hard time for non-violent felonies.

For example: That shoplifting incident? We got one. He had a knife in his boot/jacket/on his belt? That's two. It was covered by his coat? Concealed weapon.

75 year sentence.

"Swam across the river, and I lay down to sleep and I woke up with shackles on my feet...."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ZSO SAHALL wrote:
In the US we have problems with cops selling drugs and torturing people, stop talking about canada, your the only one here from disneyland.

I knew one from Philadelphia that took a break on his patrol to conduct a little armed robbery of a drug deal he knew about. In uniform.

He eventually was punished. Not for the armed robbery, but because he had used his squad car for personal use.


That said, I view the US very much as Disneyland. Want to get the cops to kill your enemies? Arrange an anonymous tip to the police about their dealings in a town where the cops are known to be on the take. Then call ahead and tell them the police are coming to kill all of them.

You'd be amazed how many idiots will fire on the cops. And then usually all bets are off.

All political/philisophical debate aside, clearly SW are not 'good guys', much less the only good guys in 40k.

Let us agree on the following:
-there are no good guys in the grim future, only varying degrees of oppressive government.
-the term 'good guys' is fairly arbritary, and therefor lends contention/frustration to the discussion.
-fans of any 40k faction will, obviously, like their chosen faction. They will rationalize any unseemly deeds done by their faction, and focus on the praiseworthy ones.
- SW are an arrogant, hypocritical, ignorant pack of mongrels.

...ok, you don't have to agree to that last one, but the rest should be pretty solid across the board.

Archonate wrote:

Justicar_Thunderflanks wrote:The Tau are reliant on an Aristocracy of Orwellian proportions led by a ruling caste which condemns the creative mind.

I agree with your other summaries, but I think this one more accurately describes the imperium. "An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded" as the imperial saying goes.

The Tau have advanced so quickly through lack of corruption and encouragement of creativity. The Ethereals may have loyalty-inducing pheromones, but even when not in their presence the Tau genuinely love their leaders and honor their wisdom and experience with reverence. As a race they're remarkably unified, organized and forward thinking. The only known exception to their unity is Commander Farsight, who is still loyal to the Tau race.

I would say the dark side of the Tau is their 'Our way is the only right way. Join us or die' mentality.

On topic: Personally I've always felt that Space Wolves are the most thoughtless and chaotic of the SM chapters. Thinking that they're better than the other chapters just because they don't care about rules.

The Tau do not have a 'join us or die' mentality. There has been no time that i have seen (in the 8 years since i started W40K) that suggests this at all. They didn't kill the Vespid when they refused, and several other races are only trading with them instead of being an actual part of the Empire. The only things i can think of that even slightly suggest this would be things such as the Dawn of War games, but in those times it is someone who is already their enemy refusing to join.

Nothing suggests there is anything controlling the Tau (such as pheremones) other than random Imperial Speculation because they refuse to believe the Tau would just obey.

The Tau are the most 'good' out of all the races.

It depends on which books you've read. Prospero Burns and A Thousand Sons portray the Wolves very differently (on purpose, I think, as the stories are written from different perspectives). Ultimately, the Wolves are what you want them to be: either bestial, noble warriors or vicious, uncaring savages. As an avid Space Wolves player, I can say there are probably elements of both within the chapter. The one constant among Wolves is that above all, they're individualistic.

But definitely wouldn't say they're the only good guys. I'd also throw in some chapters others have mentioned, like Ultramarines, Salamanders, White Scars, etc.

TheSovereign wrote:It depends on which books you've read. Prospero Burns and A Thousand Sons portray the Wolves very differently (on purpose, I think, as the stories are written from different perspectives). Ultimately, the Wolves are what you want them to be: either bestial, noble warriors or vicious, uncaring savages.

or secret answer D) all of the above. You were right in saying that elements of both are present, but it doesn't matter whether you want them to be or not; they are what they are. A successor chapter might escape their bestial/savage side a bit if you want them to, or embrace it fully. The Space Wolves have good aspects to them, and bad aspects to them. That's what makes them (super)human.

either bestial, noble warriors or vicious, uncaring savages.

Couldn't agree more, all the Legions are meant to be both noble and savage, same for the Night Lords, they can either be seen as sadistic criminals no different from those they supposedly opposed, or they can be a noble legion lead by a just man who opposed the Emperor attaining Godhood at the expense of mankind.

My own take on the conversation between Curze and Lion.
Lion:"We shall expunges the eighth Legion from Imperial records, uttering the name of your Legion will be punishable by death, the Night Lords will be forgotten.

Curze: The universe will remember that free men stood against a tyrant, that few stood against many, and that by the end of the Heresy even a God King could bleed.

Minor detail: SW have, as far as I know, never successfully had a successor chapter.

BaronIveagh wrote:Minor detail: SW have, as far as I know, never successfully had a successor chapter.

I want to say thats correct. I think they tried to create the Wolf Brothers chapter. IIRC every single wolf brother turned wolfen, the SW geneseed mutation. After that they were like, let's not try that again.

Clearly Je Suis2 hasn't had any experience with police in Edmonton, Alberta. And RCMP are corrupt to the core. haha

FifteenHours wrote:Clearly Je Suis2 hasn't had any experience with police in Edmonton, Alberta. And RCMP are corrupt to the core. haha

I already made a joke about them, because they're a joke.

And I have been their, and given lectures at a precinct there, and corrupt was minimal.