The Unknown Poster

FBI was alerted in September that this suspect had made remarks about being a school shooter.

Gun control isnt even that difficult. Firstly, it is shown that restrictive gun control laws do work to curb mass shootings. Thats a fact. So this is really simple. If Americans want to curb mass shootings, they need stricter gun control. Very very simple. But there is a sense that Americans dont want gun control. Thats nonsense. Its all about the vocal minority and the massive cash that flows from gun lobbyists that dont give a **** about citizens and just want to keep gun manufactures reaping massive profits. Its not a second amendment issue. Thats been co-opted by these groups to make American's think that the government is out to violate their rights. 83% of Americans see gun violence as a big problem. 50% see it as a VERY big problem. But the government and GOP congress suck at the teat of the minority because of the lobbyist money. Disgraceful. 47% of Americans believe stricter gun control would reduce mass shootings. 68% support banning assault rifles. This is SO easy. You have majority support for this.

Dont forget that Trump immediately scrapped an Obama era gun rule that would prevented some mentally ill people from owning guns. I cant say that this shooter qualified under that rule. But its pretty galling that Trump's remarks are about the mental illness of the shooter after scrapping a law to prevent mentally ill people from getting guns. A guy on CNN said it well, America has to stop pretending its exceptional and superior and look at what a violent outlier it is in the world. They need to look at Austraila and follow in their footsteps:

They want to cut back on the amount of PPV's in total. The feeling had been that adding PPV's would drive network subscriptions but that wasnt the case. So extra PPV's just add expenses with very little revenue (outside of live audience ticket sales which have been soft as well). They also feel its tougher to book TV when there are the occasional long gaps between brand-specific PPV's (although to me this is more a by-product of shitty writers). The Network was profitable but way, way, way behind estimates when they launched. They backed off on buying video libraries too because they found that the archives are not subscription drivers. In fact the only thing that is, is the Rumble to Mania season where they add a lot of subs, generally off the back of cheap or free subscriptions and then slowly lose subs the rest of the year.

Its so crazy because it really came from their desire to do "something different" with Luke. You didnt need to do anything different. Had he walked out for real to confront the First Order and engaged in an epic force/saber fight, fans would have been cheering. You know the director was making fun of fans when he had Luke actually say "what did you expect me to do, fight the whole first order with a light sword?" That was a sarcastic condescending line from the director to the fans.

Ive seen this a few times. Sometimes in the "as a man I cant even flit with a girl anymore". The easy answer is, if you dont know, you're doing something wrong. There are virtually no examples during this metoo movement of victims coming forward with tales of "he asked me out for a nice dinner" or "he said my hair looked good". Lets not confuse the issue. This is about harassment and abuse. We all know what that is. Yes. very different from the Metoo movement and the vast majority of victims who have come forward. Many incidents have a statute of limitations that have run out. Let's not buy into the nonsense that if someone was really a victim they'd have gone to the police already or that its such a wonderful experience to come forward. Women that come forward are treated awfully. The major take away (and the reason I even posted the link knowing the replies that would follow), is this is the exception. Taking one instance out of countless legitimate ones and trying to de-legitimize them all is akin to doing away with the justice system because some innocent people are convicted. Some people spend a lot of energy on the false allegation rather then the overwhelmingly MORE legitimate ones.

They begin production in April. Already working on writing Season 2. Its just the time it takes to produce an effects heavy show. They are essentially right back at it.

Already laying the groundwork to change the narrative. It’s a mental health issue, not a gun issue. Yeah right

Student on cnn right now saying the shooter had guns and showed them to kids and “everyone knew, everyone predicted”.

It’s a no brainer. Hunting rifles and protection pistols aren’t even the topic. These high powered weapons are common sense issue. Get rid of them. Entirely and completely. And today.

The GOP playbook will be to condescend to anyone demanding change right now. They will say this is the time for grieving not “politics”. They will say don’t use dead kids for political gain. Sxrew that. If they don’t ban these rifles right now there is something incredibly deeply disgustingly wrong with the US and every republican should be voted out.

ASsault rifle. If only there was something that could be done. Another horrific tragedy. 17 dead.

Yup. Giving us a "predictable" film that organically follows the narrative and delivers the highs that fans want. Or what we got which was the too-smart artsy film maker who wants to deliver a film no one expects.

She could make a short film about it

The PC's dont get to decide whether a person runs. He just cant run for the PC's. And that's their decision. I think it's really awful when someone makes an untrue allegation. And they should be prosecuted for doing so and subject to civil penalty. Brown can sue her and CTV news as well. Had she made the complaint to police, she'd likely be subject to charges for false complaint. Her position is likely that she got the dates wrong. However, that's somewhat dubious. If Im Brown and the PC's, Id be considering enlisting the RCMP as to whether there was any political influence in the woman coming forward with the story. If he took her out drinking and tried to get laid, even if he was creepy about it, it doesnt make him a crook. But he would still stand to be judged on his actions. Unfortunately, in Canada, he'd be judged harshly. My position on women (and men) coming forward is that the instances of false allegation are extremely low, thats just a fact. I read a story (ill try to find it) that busted the myth that men are ruined and that, in fact, the accused generally suffer very little. Of course, high profile cases can be different, especially in politics where parties, voters etc will err on the side of running from anyone remotely tainted. And that sucks. But if this was a great way to ruin someone, it would happen all the time. It doesnt. What does happen is, the victims are routinely re-victimized by coming forward as a result of their treatment. Even in the Roman Polanski case, the victim wants to put it all behind her and thats a case where the accused should absolutely be punished. In the justice system, there are examples of innocent people put in jail. Those are awful. But no one insists that all crimes are forgiven, no one suggests we dont prosecute anyone for fear of convicting an innocent person. Because the vast majority of cases, the justice system works. Keep in mind that there is a current hyper-sensitivity to these kinds of allegations due to the metoo movement. And its a direct result of victims being shamed, disbelieved, silenced or re-victimized. Its a reckoning of sorts for years and years and years of pissing on victims and protecting abusers. There will never be a perfect system whereby we judge people (either in public opinion or court of law). You err on the side of the greater sense of right. Should Rob Porter still be Staff Secretary? We are all judged everyday by our words, deeds, actions...our character and morality. We dont go to court to prove or disprove everything about ourselves. This is our world. And in the vast majority of cases these are not false allegations. I'd take a "trust but verify" approach. Thats my feeling. As strong as I am on the side of women and victims. But you do have to believe. It doesnt mean you dont verify or listen to your intuition when something smells wrong. If it was CTV that broke the story that Brown committed illegal acts with a minor and it was untrue, he should sue the heck out of them.

There is movement to have a Snyder cut of Justice League released. News came out this week that Snyder was actually fired after studio execs watched an "unwatchable" cut of the film. Actor Ciaran Hinds claims Snyder's version was better.

Which has little to do with legitimate victims coming forward. To want all women silenced because a vast minority of incidents are untrue doesnt make sense. There is also a second allegation against him. And as a public figure he is prone to have his conduct judged whether its legal or illegal. He can run in the next election.

Well she was driving but any stunt needs preparation. She wasnt comfortable which should have been reason enough not to do it. In my own experience approving stunts in wrestling, if someone is not comfortable, they are more prone to an accident. Anyone who has driven at high speed on a gravel road knows it can be easy to slide out. QT has walked back his comments on Polanski. But its really really vile. Of course, Whoopie Goldberg defended Polanski too and said "it wasnt rape rape"...because you know, the pretty 13 year old wanted it. If anyone should be blackballed in Hollywood, its Polanski.

Dont make the mistake of thinking this is a condemnation of the #metoo movement. Of course victims should be believed. There is a big difference between the court of public opinion and the court of law.

http://torontosun.com/news/provincial/key-accusation-against-patrick-brown-false-ctv-now-admits So unless Im missing something, the issue here is that Brown went out drinking with a consenting adult and tried to get laid? Burn him at the stake. Its a good lesson for journalists that they HAVE to check dates and facts.

The only film I almost walked out of was Judge Dredd (Sly Stallone). And I never leave after I've paid to see a film. I did fall asleep watching Lord of the Rings but by then-gf liked the books and insisted we see them. However, about two minutes into Man of Steel, I turned to my friend and whispered "uh oh". I knew it was going to suck.

I love that they still call these films "The Skywalker Saga". Yeah right.

I think Wonder Woman is the only DCEU film that would fit in the MCU in terms of quality and enjoyability. Has the same mix of humor and drama and charm. It was well cast which is not the norm for DCEU thus far (although Flash and Aquaman are well cast).

The interesting thing is, I knew nothing about the graphic novel. I knew zero. Never heard of it. I went to see the film in the theatre and I didnt get it. I thought it was weird and corny. I guess I figured it would be a traditional straight forward superhero film. A year or so later, it was on Movie Central and I happened to flip to it. It piqued my interest and I watched it again. And fell in love with it. I caught so much more of what it was about. And I love the music and the sound editing. It wasnt until after I loved the film that I read up on the novel. I know some people hate the film. I believe Orci and Kurtzman wrote it or did a re-write of it and I always give them credit while saying I cant believe the same guys wrote Watchmen and Star Trek Into Darkness. lol