Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by TheDivineHustle

  1. TheDivineHustle

    What did you do?

    This is hilarious. Popped in for a second to see this, thanks. I needed that laugh.
  2. TheDivineHustle

    Leaving for a While

    I really do like a lot of your work and it's very sad to see you go along with your work. The internet is generally very toxic across the board, but it sometimes seems to be especially true in some specific places more than others. I've also been taking a break from the community myself for some of the same reasons you've shared. The website acts as a great hub for outstanding work from different authors, but sometimes the actual community itself can be toxic. Anyways, take care and I hope to see you back with your work!
  3. TheDivineHustle

    Did You Say One More?

    When does this pack plan to release?
  4. TheDivineHustle

    [WIP] Enhanced LSPD Cop

    Hey man, is there any way that I can remove the beanie? It kinda doesn't make sense to have officers wearing beanies in the sun with a short sleeve shirt.
  5. TheDivineHustle

    Texas school shooting

    Thanks for the information, I wasn't aware of that at all. Regardless, my point still stands: That's not what they're saying though is what you aren't getting.
  6. TheDivineHustle

    Texas school shooting

    Wrong. Owning a weapon is a right, as literally stated by the US Constitution and declared by the US Supreme Court numerous times. Unless, of course, you know better than the US Supreme Court. You took what he said literally and missed the context in which he was speaking, which led to you and the others misunderstanding him and thinking that he was comparing losing a gun directly to being a slave. That's why you find it so outrageous because you don't actually have any idea what he's talking about because you don't understand what he's trying to say. You also don't understand the intentions behind the 2nd amendment as noted by: Yes... own firearms for what purpose? If you don't believe that the government would freely oppress us and take our rights, you're completely blinded. You've got to understand that there are things going on that you and the general populous don't even know about. There's a reason why certain government positions require secret security clearances. A lot of those government actions are kept hidden, you have no idea. You just think that, since you don't actively see it with your own eyes, it's not happening or couldn't happen. That's a very naive mindset. But did I take the quote out of context? Sounds like you're trying to pull a strawman on me, friend.
  7. TheDivineHustle

    Texas school shooting

    I do too, but I feel the problem stems deeper than just guns, and that's what a lot of people don't understand. Taking away the gun isn't going to forever solve the problems that we have in our school systems. A comparison between the UK and US on this matter doesn't make any sense to me because the circumstances are completely different. There are just too many different variables to make a reasonable comparison.
  8. TheDivineHustle

    Texas school shooting

    Well, on the basis of an "assault rifle" ban, it's already been tried and numerous research centers have concluded that it would have little to no significant change on violent crime/mass shootings. So there is plenty of evidence to back it up, actually.
  9. TheDivineHustle

    Texas school shooting

    It's not ridiculous to view gun restrictions as a form of slavery when you consider the fact that some of the first gun control laws were used to prohibit blacks and Indians from purchasing firearms. You and the others have taken his words out of context, which shows a lack of understanding his entire argument. It's not a literal comparison to slavery, but rather a conceptual comparison. The 2nd amendment is literally the only barrier between the government violating our rights as Americans.
  10. TheDivineHustle

    Texas school shooting

    Just want to pop in and say that comparing one country to another on the basis of gun control is illogical. I’ll sit back and await responses from a few people that have left me hanging, as usual.
  11. TheDivineHustle

    Texas school shooting

    The weapon should be secured, a teenage high school kid shouldn't be able to go grab his/her parents weapon in a snap. That's an irresponsible gun-owner, in which the NRA and the right-wingers are against. Most of us are also adults. The entire purpose of a debate is to put conflicting ideas onto the table and decide on which would be more efficient and effective to enact. If you aren't going to fully support your stance and just leave mid-debate, then why participate, to begin with? Seems like a wasted effort on your part to half-ass an argument and then dip, leaving your opponents even more firmly against your argument since you left unnoticed. You either formally exit the discussion, or you agree to disagree. That's how you keep your opponents from finding your opinions comical. I respect your opinion and I always have, but for someone else, it'd be easy for them to not respect it if you just leave without saying anything repeatedly. Why someone needs any type of weapon isn't really of anyone else's concern but that person. Also, you can ask the Police. A vast majority of them are even in favor of concealed carry because they believe that it will help reduce shootings against Police and save the lives of officers. They're the people most likely to deal with gun violence on a daily basis, yet they somehow overwhelmingly support gun ownership. Hmm, interesting. "My side", I'm not on any side in this asinine political war that we've got going on in the US. I'm on the side of freedom, liberty, and the constitution being upheld and protected from people that wish to desecrate, disobey, and disrespect it. Don't associate me with the nuts on the right side of the spectrum. Just because those teenagers survived a terrible massacre doesn't mean that they're now ready to make decisions on behalf of the entire country in regards to our gun laws. They're as ignorant now as they were before the massacre, probably even more so. Yes, a majority of Americans are against the complete banning of any type of weapon, including weapons that very uneducated people like to call "assault rifles". Assault weapons were banned in 1986, what you're asking for is a ban on semi-automatic sporting firearms. People should really know what exactly they're talking about before they try to make laws regarding them. I think that's part of the problem with this country as a whole. I'd also like to remind you of the 10-year ban signed into law by former President Clinton, and I'd like you to compare the deaths from before to after. Because no, the beloved ban that you and a handful of other Americans want didn't and wouldn't work. The facts are not in your favor, as elaborated on in the first spoiler. Here's a video to help for educational purposes too:
  12. TheDivineHustle

    Texas school shooting

    Not responding to a debate generally means that you've inherently lost. It's not coincidental that you and the others decide to just stop responding at the same point in every gun debate we've ever had. When the numbers and the facts come out, you disappear. When other users come out and call your statements and arguments as fallacies with inconsistencies, we stop receiving responses from you guys. It happens every time man. As for your desired sources, I encourage you to ruffle around inside of this because I've posted them all over: Yes, and so do a vast majority of Americans. I don't ever recall saying that a majority of Americans own guns. What I have said in the past is that a majority of gun owners are well-educated on their weapons, a majority of gun owners are Republicans, and a majority of Republicans keep guns in their homes and don't support any sort of ban or harsh restriction on guns. This is the problem with the US. Since I disagree with your opinion, I'm suddenly some hardcore Fox News watching right-wing conservative. I didn't even vote for Trump, so I have no idea what you're talking about on that note. And no, I'm not. Most Americans support "common sense" gun control, which you've listed above. Most Americans do not support anything further than that, according to Gallup's polling.
  13. TheDivineHustle

    Texas school shooting

    No, that's not my argument. My argument is that more responsible gun owners will reduce the chances of violence. I don't recall anyone ever saying that throwing more guns into the mix will fix the problem, but alright homie. The problem is that I'm not wrong, I'm right. Most political debates today are based solely on opinion and perspective. This is not one of them. The facts and the rest of the US are against you, you are the minority view. At least you've got some misguided and uninformed high schoolers on your side though. Hitler did say those that control the youth control the future.
  14. TheDivineHustle

    Texas school shooting

    I encourage you to view some older topics, your argument has been disproven several times already. People believe that the government has a duty to protect them, when the same government has declared that law enforcement don’t have a constitutional obligation to keep citizens safe from criminals. lol
  15. TheDivineHustle


    Yeah, I double checked. When I press the key to bring up the menu, the game will freeze for a brief second and then I'll get a little circle in the middle of my screen, looks similar to the UI for the CCM. Then it will go away and the menu key won't do anything from there.
  16. TheDivineHustle

    Texas school shooting

    Definitely a tragedy. Maybe one day America will wake up and address the problems that our young adults are facing. Everyone always says, "Oh, they're just kids. They don't have any real struggles or issues going on." That's clearly not the case, and our young people are put into terrible circumstances in schools, then everyone's surprised when someone takes their own life or the life of someone else.
  17. TheDivineHustle


    Doesn't work at all man.
  18. TheDivineHustle

    Signing out.

    Take care man, really enjoy using your car mods!
  19. TheDivineHustle

    Knife attack in a Chinese School

    Not sure who said that they would.
  20. Under the circumstance that individual is putting other peoples safety and lives at risk, I'd say yes; it is entirely up to law enforcement to determine whether or not the individual needs to be neutralized. The well-being of the suspect is on law enforcement agenda, but the well-being of innocent people and other officers takes priority. If it comes down to the life of an officer or innocent person versus the suspect, the suspect loses all day every day. When officers are firing their weapons, that's the implication (under most circumstances) that lethal force is indeed necessary because they've already started shooting. I advocate for harmony and tranquility for those of us that can act like we have some sense and decency. Anyone else, well, Darwinism can and should take its toll. If someone were to cut me off, I'd respond. I wouldn't necessarily run them off the road, but I'd ensure they never do it to me again. I don't recall ever saying that when someone is shot down, they should be executed or neglected of aid. My point is that when shots are fired, the intention isn't to subdue the individual. The intent is for them to be neutralized. If they happen to live through it, then apply aid as necessary after any other innocent people have been administered aid prior. I'd like you to come witness how well our court systems work first-hand. Better yet, speak to some of the individuals that have gone through it.
  21. I don't entirely agree with that philosophy. If an officer has discharged his weapon at someone, there are no second chances. The individual now needs to be neutralized, because they actually pushed law enforcement to fire their weapon and they're a threat to public or officer safety (if the shooting is justified). There is no leg shot or arm shot, it's a fatal shot, and I don't understand why you'd have sympathy for an individual like that.
  22. I understand your point, but I don't agree. If we're holding law enforcement to a higher standard, then I'd presume them to be justified in (not everything) but most of what they do on a daily basis. That's completely reasonable to me. When I see an officer wrestling with someone, pulling someone over, or arresting someone, I presume that the officer is the one that's correct even though I don't know anything about the situation. It's why people stop to help the Police when they see them fighting with an individual on the side of the road. The chances of the officer being the wrong party in that situation are little to none. When the facts and evidence surface, then I'll make a more sound decision based on what I know. Until then, I'm not siding with some accused criminal over the Police. Of course, I understand what you're saying, man. But in my opinion, if we're going to demand more, then we should be more confident in presuming that law enforcement made the right decision because we're expecting them to meet our high standards. I have low expectations of the Baltimore City Police specifically, for example. So whenever I hear about a situation where Baltimore Police are involved, I presume that they were wrong and unjustified because I don't have very high standards of them, because I don't expect them to make the right decisions based on the circumstances of the city.
  23. Yeah, this will occasionally crash the entire game with the new update.
  24. Under this philosophy, those same individuals that hold law enforcement to a higher standard should automatically presume that law enforcement shootings are justified until further evidence surfaces proving otherwise. To me, it's illogical to hold law enforcement to a high standard but then automatically assume that they're guilty, or be more likely to declare them guilty before facts and evidence actually release to the public. If we're going to hold the Police to a higher standard, then we should be on their side unless evidence says otherwise. I don't want to see people saying "Oh, another trigger-happy cop". Because those high standards imply that the Police are usually justified in their decisions.