California Mountain Snake

That's what she said.

Usually the foremost staysail of a ship.

I was actually in Akihabara, Tokyo (nerd spooge zone, if you don't know) when they were airing the last episode of Endless Eight. No one in the crowd of people watching it was pissed, like I'd imagine true nerds to be. Maybe this is one giant fucking lost in translation from Japan to planet Earth.

Dr. Lazarus > Snape

I'm the exception to that ;3. No. You don't.

None anymore. The only previous video game forum I frequented was DGN, a forum dedicated to the Command and Conquer RTS series (It has since gone downhill). The other forum I was a significant member of (over 1000 posts) was TFF, a large forum about tropical fish and the aquarium hobby. Of course before Serenes I was a member of FESS, but I never had many posts there, ironically enough.

Skill at blowjobs: best: Cynthia, worst: Sirius, honorable mention: Namie Amuro

Not formal, but extra polite (there's a difference). It's the polite word for "arimasu", which means roughly to have (which has a few more uses in Japanese other than ownership, unlike the English translation). If you translate the kanji of arigatou (which I have never actually seen used, it's always in kana) it means literally to have difficulty (the first part, ari, is the same as the verb "ari"masu, from above), IE you've put yourself through trouble for me. Gozaimasu just emphasizes that, and although a little proper, I think it would more likely be what you would use in the situation above. Then again, anime is always in the most casual of casual speech (calling yourself ore and other omae after just meeting them), so I guess you would probably never hear that on the show.

Turn off your JP keyboard, damn weeaboo. It was just for the first word, then I fixed it! God!

Ｉｔ’ｓ amazing, now being in college, how much I can't care about this topic anymore. No longer do these meaningless labels and shit have to annoy me. It's almost like... being free.

Correction. Y'all are pathetic.

What are the asterisks for? Shit? SHIT? Oh fuck you almost said SHIT! Damn that would have FUCKING SUCKED. Edit: Missed this whole dialogue Decided to go for the throat when I saw it instead. Fuck me, right?

I think you should add a gozaimasu, but that's just me.

This is pathetic.

You actually change your font type? I tend to play mutliplayer games where there is no computer AI so I don't notice any change in difficulty. But really. have you ever encountered a video game that was too hard to beat eventually, even on the hardest mode? All video games are easy, otherwise the companies which produce them would never make any money.

Clarify "western sauces."

I tried doing a Google search on seat belt death statistics, and none of the websites I've encountered have mentioned any figures about people killed yearly due to other passengers not wearing a seat belt (although some pro-seatbelt websites listed great speculation of how much a damage a flying body could potentially do, this was never backed up by any reports of actual injuries or deaths). I think before you make this argument, you need to prove that a non-negligible amount of people are injured by unbuckled passengers. And to me, this is the only argument, if even true in the first place, which makes sense to justify the law. To people arguing that the state has to pay to clean up your body, remember that as a taxpayer the road and the services of the state are as much yours as anyone else's, so to claim you're "stealing money" by forcing the state to clean up an accident is preposterous; we pay taxes for those services.

At this point I'm just sorry for your parents.

-$500,000 for all homeless people's transportation. -$36,000 per family Support for the homeless is much more expensive. I see nothing wrong with this as long as there's no coercion involved. At least unlike in Japan, they're allowed to come back if they please.

Let's hope the rest of you follows.

This topic was somewhat broached in the seatbelt law thread in this forum, but rather than sidetrack that discussion I thought I would move the discussion here. Recreational drugs create a lot of problems in the world. They themselves are dangerous in excess or with especially powerful ones even small quantities can be deadly, but above that there are even more dangerous crimes committed around the production, transport, and selling of illegal recreational drugs on an underground market. Most recently, thousands of people have been killed in Mexico due to increased government crackdowns on Mexico-US border drug-smuggling towns, with an estimated 4000 people killed in Mexico this year alone, and 12,000 total since 2006. In a particularly illustrative article here, it's easy to see how drug use in the US has had major spillover effects; creating gang controlled border towns, facilitating illegal drug trade and in turn increasing illegal gun exports to Mexican gangs, resulting in increased violence and crime levels. In terms of national security, most terrorist organizations, including Al-Qaeda, have funded their operations almost exclusively from illegal drug trading, with countries like Afghanistan and North Korea collecting huge portions of their GDP from illegal drug trade. The United States' "War on Drugs," largely regarded as an utter failure, has done little to curb this violence, and in fact by eliminating smaller, less efficient drug operations, the United States has allowed large cartels to do business as never before, vastly increasing the value of their products. This extreme profitability means that the United States would have to seize over 75% of all drug shipments before they drug leaders saw any loss, and in reality only 10-30% of shipments are being seized now, despite ramped up efforts. The question is, what can be done about this? I am interested to hear your opinions, and below I have detailed mine: To see an effective end to the vast criminal network associated with the production, distribution, and sale of illegal recreational drugs, the only complete solution that exists is simple: across the board drug legalization. If drugs could be purchased in the same way we buy cigarettes and alcohol, the demand for dangerous, underground drugs would virtually vanish, along with any profit margins that drug lords once enjoyed. Countries like Afghanistan and North Korea would no longer have markets to sell their drugs on if everyone could produce their own for cheap, and an easy source of income for organized crime and terrorist organizations would be abolished, severely weakening these organizations. This decrease in crime, as well as the elimination of drug related arrests, would also leave our police forces more free to deal with other concerns and offer better protection, while reducing tax dollars spend on catching marijuana users. Moreover, the legalization of drugs has not been proven to lead to an increase in abuse, and in fact countries such as the Netherlands have seen a decrease in the number of hard drug abusers and a vast increase in the number of people who seek help, which can be funded by the government without conflict of interest, resulting in a very low percentage of "problem drug-users" compared to other countries (source). The gateway drug theory, arguing that people who start smoking marijuana will move on to more dangerous drugs for a greater high, has been largely disproven. Moreover, by selling drugs legally they will be subject to the same quality control that regulates all other legally sold products, reducing the chance that dangerous chemicals will be inserted into the drugs. The final argument is one of freedom. As discussed briefly in the other thread, drug use a consensual crime, where both the seller and the user agree to the act, but the government has outlawed the activity. Using a drug in its own right affects no one but the voluntary consumer. If we are to accept that all people are equal, then it makes no sense that another person can tell you what you are allowed to do to yourself, anymore than you can force another person to do something against their choosing. Only when drug use is combined with activities such as driving can it be made illegal, because of the significant dangers it poses to other people. In addition, although some people may destroy their lives with drugs, being convicted of a even a consensual crime such as smoking pot by the government will ruin a persons' life guaranteed, by spoiling future job opportunities,ability to get insurance and credit, and forcing them to waste their time away in jail on our tax dollars. This makes little sense. I'm sure that many people will not agree with what I've said, but I would be curious to hear from everyone, especially those who may not agree entirely with what I propose but may agree in part. Widely discussed is the possible legalization of marijuana, which is largely proved to be a mostly harmless drug in comparison with cigarettes; impossible to overdose on and yielding relatively mild results that do not increase violent behavior. Most drug related arrests in the US are related to Marijuana, and for certain it's legalization would have a significant impact on drug crime in the US. If we're going to move in baby steps, I think that marijuana is certainly the first place to start.