Game Design Sketchbook: Police Brutality

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

So the guy was being stupid, but why the tazers? How many officers where there? Four? And they can't restrain one guy? They are fucking cowards. Are they so scared of getting a black eye they will taze a guy? He was resisting, sure, but he wasn't dangerous. He wasn't throwing punches.
The same as the guy Canadian cops tazed to death. He smashed a computer screen, I understand, he had to be arrested. But he never threatened anyone and was three male officers there. They never even tried to restrain him with their hands, they went straight for the tazer. They are supposed to protect the public (yes, even suspects) but and the first threat of a bruise they chicken out.

Supermane1985:
When it does happen it's because of a pre-existing condition that would not have been an issue if the person had complied.

I have a pre-existing condition where I'm allergic to bulletholes. I guess that isn't an issue so long as I comply?

I'm not commenting on the content of the write-up, the police incidents in question, or the game itself in my statement above. Just the humorous, sad nature of the one statement.

As far as the game goes, the concept was interesting, and the mechanic is something I don't think I've encountered before, and think I could enjoy in other contexts.

I suppose the questions are:

Is it acceptable to use a taser on a suspect that is kicking, screaming, and flailing to such an extent that five officers are unable to rapidly handcuff him?

If someone is resisting to the point that the police are unable to handcuff him with five officers, does he pose any danger to himself, the officers, or bystanders?

Is it reasonable to believe that if five officers are having difficulty handcuffing a suspect, the use of additional muscle and physical force is as likely to do harm to the suspect as a taser?

I'm pretty sure that if the officers had dislocated the guys shoulder in the process of handcuffing him, we'd be having the same conversation about excessive force, but saying they could have used a taser.

Personally, when I first saw this, I thought the guy was high.

Just saw this today and it seemed appropriate.

Canadian law enforcement agencies have swallowed the propaganda of the company that manufactures Tasers, an expert testified Tuesday at a public inquiry in Vancouver examining police use of the weapons.

Officers are reaching for Tasers when communication and non-life threatening responses could do the trick, Webster testified. He told the inquiry there is only one situation where a Taser might be appropriate.

"That would be the last thing before you have to shoot somebody," Webster testified.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2008/05/13/bc-080513-taser-inquiry-webster.html

The politics of this moment are like a chess game played without any time to think - that's what paralyzes.

And for anyone listening, at one point on the ground he clearly says 'Let me go and I'll walk out'.

But the police won't do that because he pulled away from them and resisted and now they are in lock down mode. But then again, he did that because they simply walked up to him and grabbed him. What if they had circled around in front of him/sides (very easy) and simply motioned him to leave, slowly advancing and moving him closer to the exit then right outside?

The fact is, they decided he didn't deserve the chance at human dignity of walking out on his own two feet. I specifically mean chance - perhaps he would have used the chance to rush them. But his comment on the floor suggests he would have walked out (I'm sure loudly, but he'd be gone in just a minute or two).

The question is, have the police been given powers over your dignity? Like it can be disposed of at their discretion? That seems a bit odd, doesn't it? For no practical reason, police may extinquish your dignity? Is that what you voted for as a citizen? Note: for some in this thread, yeah, it is. I'm not trying to argue you out of that - I'm making the question clear for people who realise they didn't grant those powers.

Sadly all these questions are rather hard to compose and raise properly in the minute amount of time the event happened in. I don't think the games premise is spot on - blocking the police doesn't make sense if as a citizen you granted the police power to begin with. I think some game based on raising a chant in the crowd along the lines of 'We didn't give you this power!' chanted over and over again and spreading through those people who didn't grant that power, might make a spot on game. Police are just the gang who wear blue - they have morale which is based on public support. Demonstrate that support isn't there, and you likely break their morale. Just gotta figure how to put it into game format.

For those supporting the police actions, btw, might want to consider whether the police give a damn about your support - they'd do it whether you supported them or not. Supporting them doesn't mean they care about you any more than the guy they had on the ground. Your not on the same team cause you cheer them - their not a sports team. Be a bit more savy than that. Feel free to agree with their actions, but don't start thinking they'd look after you any more because of your support.

Hinoon:
The politics of this moment are like a chess game played without any time to think - that's what paralyzes.

And for anyone listening, at one point on the ground he clearly says 'Let me go and I'll walk out'.

But the police won't do that because he pulled away from them and resisted and now they are in lock down mode. But then again, he did that because they simply walked up to him and grabbed him. What if they had circled around in front of him/sides (very easy) and simply motioned him to leave, slowly advancing and moving him closer to the exit then right outside?

The fact is, they decided he didn't deserve the chance at human dignity of walking out on his own two feet. I specifically mean chance - perhaps he would have used the chance to rush them. But his comment on the floor suggests he would have walked out (I'm sure loudly, but he'd be gone in just a minute or two).

The question is, have the police been given powers over your dignity? Like it can be disposed of at their discretion? That seems a bit odd, doesn't it? For no practical reason, police may extinquish your dignity? Is that what you voted for as a citizen? Note: for some in this thread, yeah, it is. I'm not trying to argue you out of that - I'm making the question clear for people who realise they didn't grant those powers.

Sadly all these questions are rather hard to compose and raise properly in the minute amount of time the event happened in. I don't think the games premise is spot on - blocking the police doesn't make sense if as a citizen you granted the police power to begin with. I think some game based on raising a chant in the crowd along the lines of 'We didn't give you this power!' chanted over and over again and spreading through those people who didn't grant that power, might make a spot on game. Police are just the gang who wear blue - they have morale which is based on public support. Demonstrate that support isn't there, and you likely break their morale. Just gotta figure how to put it into game format.

For those supporting the police actions, btw, might want to consider whether the police give a damn about your support - they'd do it whether you supported them or not. Supporting them doesn't mean they care about you any more than the guy they had on the ground. Your not on the same team cause you cheer them - their not a sports team. Be a bit more savy than that. Feel free to agree with their actions, but don't start thinking they'd look after you any more because of your support.

As a police officer in study I will tell you this.

His initial reaction was, of course, expected. I would jump too if someone just grabbed me from behind, however, as you can see from the videos he is completely aware the officers are behind him, as they almost walked him out earlier. After the initial shock, when he realized that authorities were kicking him out, he should have simply walked out quietly. Unfortunately, he wanted them to jump him like that, so he could wave his little conspiracy banner. Note that he copped an attitude when they cut off his mic, then as soon as they started to escort him he was asking why he was being arrested. They didn't even mention arresting him yet and were more than likely just going to walk him out. Even so, he continued to resist. Not only that, but he did it in a fashion that invoked the whole crowd. He was begging for help from the bystanders when he should have been cooperating with police. To make matters worse, he is wrestled to the ground and held at taser-point. The officers threatened him with shock if he didn't stop resisting. I emphasize the word "threatened". They didn't just shoot him without any indication they told him to stop, or he would be punished. He didn't stop, so he was punished. If the officers were truly "out there to get him" they wouldn't have given a damn whether or not he was warned.

On a separate note, Universities are no different than any private or government enterprise. They make their own rules based on status and conditions. I.E. In the average dorm one cannot be making loud noise in the middle of the night, as this would disturb others. Violating free speech? Yes, in favor of the majority.

This event was a perfect example. He got his moment in the spotlight, tried to instigate Mr. Kerry, caught attention from one of Kerry's associates, who gave the order to remove him. At first it was simply removal due to school rules, but because of his big mouth and bigger ego, it became suppression due to federal laws.

I see the same "power abuse" argument everywhere. Stupid kids in school always getting into conflicts with teachers because "I have the right to yell in class, freedom of speech"...

Wah! I guess everyone should get to say whatever they want to whoever they want, always... I mean, that's why forums have admins, right? To protect the rights of the internet users?

No, because each private forum has it's own rules, the kid was there by choice, just like we are on this forum by choice. He chose to ignite the powder keg and got caught in the crossfire.

Stop taking rights for granted by doing stupid shit.

(P.S. He wasn't going to walk out, are you kidding? He wanted them to let him back up so he could start instigating the crowd again. Look at his tone and reactions to every other event, he's just another typical youtube ass, out there for ten seconds of fame.

Also, believe it or not, the police do like your support, and will go a hell of a lot farther to protect those who do not question their decisions. You make police out to be some sort of friendless vigilantes who care for no-one but themselves. What does that make criminals? Martyrs for the American way? Get real, police are ordinary people who do ordinary jobs. It's not like they asked to get stuck with some dumbass kid who can't shut up. They just listen to those above them because they trust our system of government. For someone who still realizes that we vote for those in power I am surprised that you could be so critical of officers. As a matter of fact, things are probably the opposite. Criminals and punks like this kid will never read these petty comments, and the little fad that is this video will fade because in reality no one cares about the poor little college boy who talked to much. The police officers you criticize so heavily however, are a bit more abundant. I mean, I am criticizing one stupid kid, you're criticizing a whole nation of officers. Trust me, support goes a lot further on my side of the fence.)

Taser was unnecessary, it was already 4 vs 1 unarmed.

Stupid kids in school? So i guess you have nothing against this story: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/25/earlyshow/main690601.shtml

There are better ways to handle situations, in both cases it was excessive use of force.

sequio:
Taser was unnecessary, it was already 4 vs 1 unarmed.

Stupid kids in school? So i guess you have nothing against this story: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/25/earlyshow/main690601.shtml

There are better ways to handle situations, in both cases it was excessive use of force.

Why must you go to such extremes? A five year old on a tantrum is hardly any serious threat to officers. That is a pretty perfect example of true police brutality. Meyers problem wasn't near as much physical as it was mental. The more time he had in the room the better chances he had at getting the people in the room to help him.

However, since you are so convinced that the taser was so unnecessary, what would you suggest?

Obviously the officers were having a difficult time getting him down, they wouldn't have threatened if he hadn't continued, and the wouldn't have shot if he had held to his resistance. Could the officers have been better trained for physical takedowns without weapons, sure, were they, probably not. Regardless, they are the trusted providers of security at the time, so they used all of their resources, they wanted him gone, fast. When 4 officers wasn't enough intimidation to stop him, then LtL weapons was the next step.

First, guns were bad, then pepper-spray and bean-bags were bad, now tasers are bad, next batons will be bad, then limbs will be bad, and last but not least, yelling will be bad, until we have no means of stopping offenders whatsoever. Police can't stop a situation half way and choose what equipment they carry. The taser is not lethal, and causes minor paralyzation. It is usually temporary and stops a suspect dead in their tracks. Most people would be glad they didn't kill him. But why be thankful when you can be critical. What if some of the people in the crowd decided to jump in and help because he was being so unjustly tortured... A couple badly injured cops and some tear gas... Hell, the taser causes SUBSTANTIALLY lower trauma than the officers blows would if they had to get complete physical compliance.

hunterm16a2:

sequio:
Taser was unnecessary, it was already 4 vs 1 unarmed.

Stupid kids in school? So i guess you have nothing against this story: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/25/earlyshow/main690601.shtml

There are better ways to handle situations, in both cases it was excessive use of force.

Why must you go to such extremes? A five year old on a tantrum is hardly any serious threat to officers. That is a pretty perfect example of true police brutality. Meyers problem wasn't near as much physical as it was mental. The more time he had in the room the better chances he had at getting the people in the room to help him.

However, since you are so convinced that the taser was so unnecessary, what would you suggest?

Obviously the officers were having a difficult time getting him down, they wouldn't have threatened if he hadn't continued, and the wouldn't have shot if he had held to his resistance. Could the officers have been better trained for physical takedowns without weapons, sure, were they, probably not. Regardless, they are the trusted providers of security at the time, so they used all of their resources, they wanted him gone, fast. When 4 officers wasn't enough intimidation to stop him, then LtL weapons was the next step.

First, guns were bad, then pepper-spray and bean-bags were bad, now tasers are bad, next batons will be bad, then limbs will be bad, and last but not least, yelling will be bad, until we have no means of stopping offenders whatsoever. Police can't stop a situation half way and choose what equipment they carry. The taser is not lethal, and causes minor paralyzation. It is usually temporary and stops a suspect dead in their tracks. Most people would be glad they didn't kill him. But why be thankful when you can be critical. What if some of the people in the crowd decided to jump in and help because he was being so unjustly tortured... A couple badly injured cops and some tear gas... Hell, the taser causes SUBSTANTIALLY lower trauma than the officers blows would if they had to get complete physical compliance.

Tasers can be lethal, but that is besides the point. The reason I put the article link is because police do step over the bounds of what is acceptable as a refutation to your statement about school kids. Like I said, it was 4 - 1. If the guy became physically violent then it would make sense to use pepper spray or taser. What do you mean the officers were probably not trained for physical takedowns without weapons? That's basic training prior to wearing the uniform. The security could have just hand-cuffed him and taken him outside or down to the station. I own a business, and as the owner I physically removed a person from the establishment at my discretion. The average person doesn't know how to defend against an assailant with training. If there were 4 of me, I wouldn't pull out my pepper spray or grab for the taser to get rid of a person disprespecting my store, I would just grab him and throw him out.

You're talking about a what-if scenario in which other people decide to jump in? Then that would justify use of force by the officers, but not prior. There is no pre-emptive assault on civil disobedience. You're argument is the reason that the 5 year old was arrested, because she might have attacked the officers. Hell, they would probably have tacked on "resisting arrest" and try to give time in JH.

I have no idea where you're going with the guns, pepper spray/bean bags, tasers, batons, then limbs. So you're saying you would support physical assault before any a peaceful resolution? In the 80's when nunchucks were issued to police, do you know what they did with them? They broke people's limbs and dislocated joints forcefully under traumatic pressure/joint locks NOT from striking but after the people had already been cuffed. Police are people, and people step out of bounds all the time. When it happens, recognize it for what it is. The guy was wrong for being disruptive as he was, but the officers were wrong in reacting the way they did.

Disgusted, absolutely disgusted, not just by the police but also that some of you would try and defend actions like that? surely politicians should be able to deal with hecklers, comedians have to do it all the time, if they can't beat a heckler with a compelling argument then maybe the hecklers point has some merit. The Freedom in American really isn't free any more, you are free to do what we tell you, you are free to say what we want. Anyway here's the full transcript...

John Kerry: [Finishing the answer to the previous question]: "...and to continue to pile name upon name upon some wall in the future for a strategy that has failed. That's the distinction." [Recognizing and pointing to Andrew Meyer]: "Sir..."

Andrew Meyer: "I first and foremost want to thank you for your time. You spent a lot of time talking to us here today. I want to thank you for coming and being open and honest. You recommended a book to us earlier; I had wanted to recommend a book to you. It's called Armed Madhouse by Greg Palast.

Kerry: "Yeah, I have it, actually."

Meyer: "Yeah, he's a top investigative journalist in America."

Kerry: "I've already read it."

Meyer: "And [holding up a copy of a yellow paperback book, Armed Madhouse by Greg Palast], he says [in this book] you won the 2004 election...

Kerry: "Great."

Meyer: "Isn't that amazing! Isn't that amazing, you won in 2004! In fact, there were multiple reports, on the day of the election of disenfranchising of black voters...

Kerry: [Inaudible]

Meyer: [Officer Nicole Mallo places her left hand on the middle of Meyer's back] ...in Florida and Ohio."

Kerry: "So, what's the question? What's the question?"
[Police officer Nicole Mallo interrupts Meyer, saying "Ask your question."]

Meyer: [Turning to police officer Nicole Mallo] "I'll ask my question. Thank you very much. I'll ask my question. I'm going to preface it. He's been talking for two hours, I think I can have two minutes.

Kerry: "So, you want, you want to come up here?

Meyer: [Sarcastically to Mallo]: Thank you, thank you-thank you very much." [Officer Nicole Mallo continues to argue with Meyer who then turns to side] "I'm going to ask him my question. I'm going to inform people, and THEN I'm going to ask my question. So there were multiple reports of of disenfranchising of black voters on the day of the election in 2004."

Kerry: "Right."

Meyer: "There was also voting machines, electronic voting machines in Volusia County, Florida that counted backwards. So, amidst all these reports of phony, bogus stuff going on, how could you concede the election on the day? [small applause] How could you concede the 2004 election on the day? In this book, it says there were five million votes that were suppressed and you won the election. Didn't you want to be President?
[Police officer interrupts Meyer, again saying "Ask your question."]
I'm not even done yet, I have two more questions."

1:21 on YouTube video

Meyer: "If you were so against [attacking] Iran, how come you are not saying let's impeach George W. Bush Impeach Bush now? Impeach Bush now before he can invade Iran? Why won't we impeach him?! Impeach Bush! Clinton? Clinton was impeached, for what, a blow job?! Why don't we impeach Bush?! All right? [While speaking the next sentence, a young man in a suit makes a cutting motion with his hand, signaling for Meyer's microphone to be cut off] Also, are you a member, were you a member of Skull and Bones in college with Bush? Were you in the same secret [Meyer's microphone is cut off] society as Bush? Were you in Skull and Bones?" [turns to side and says, sarcastically]: "Thank you for cutting my mic. [turns to Senator Kerry and says] Thank you."

Kerry: "That's all right." "Let me answer his question."

[Not responding to John Kerry's request, Police officers begin to seize Andrew Meyer and take him away.]

Meyer:Are you arresting me? Excuse me, excuse me, what are you arresting me for? Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa!"

This isn't worth responding to. Remember your thoughts the next time a peace officer tries to help your community. They provide you a service, yet you question the way in which they give it. Some day you may realize that police are here to help, and bad mouthing them AS A WHOLE will only dig your hole a little deeper. America is just as free as it always has been, you don't like it, find a new home.

Wow I found this really shocking. He was carried out solely because of some question. One can ignore the question, but this...... Really really scary stuff. No offense, but I am so happy that I do not live in America when I see this. In the Netherlands the police would never ever be allowed to do that.

hunterm16a2:
This isn't worth responding to. Remember your thoughts the next time a peace officer tries to help your community. They provide you a service, yet you question the way in which they give it. Some day you may realize that police are here to help, and bad mouthing them AS A WHOLE will only dig your hole a little deeper. America is just as free as it always has been, you don't like it, find a new home.

No one's insulting the police in general, just the actions of these police in particular. Obviously we trust the police to make decisions of whom to deal with and how, but that's not the issue. The issue is: how do we stop them from getting it so wrong like they did here? And please don't use the "If you don't like America, get out!" argument; the very reason people question authority is to improve the country in which they live.

TomNook:

Being an obnoxious moron is not exercising his right to be American

Hmm.. Yes it is.

I find it interesting, too, that after the fact John Kerry said he was perfectly fine with answering the guys question. So... what was he arrested for, again?

hunterm16a2:

After the initial shock, when he realized that authorities were kicking him out, he should have simply walked out quietly.

Why should he have walk out quietly? He was trying to have a conversation. John Kerry had this to say about it.

" In 37 years of public appearances, through wars, protests and highly emotional events, I have never had a dialogue end this way. I believe I could have handled the situation without interruption, but I do not know what warnings or other exchanges transpired between the young man and the police prior to his barging to the front of the line and their intervention. I asked the police to allow me to answer the question and was in the process of responding when he was taken into custody. I was not aware that a taser was used until after I left the building. I hope that neither the student nor any of the police were injured. I regret enormously that a good healthy discussion was interrupted." - John Kerry.

So, two adults were trying to have a conversation in a public forum and he was getting booted out. That's fine. He said the word "blowjob" and broke a rule, so they cut off his mic. But why should he have to like it? Just because you're studying to be a cop doesn't mean you get to tell others how to feel about things. It's that exact egotism that gets people to despise other people that walk around with tasers and guns and feel big.

Fortunately most cops aren't actually like that. Just the outspoken ones. I've met some wonderful people that were police officers, and I'm damn glad to have them protecting me and my family. But you sound like the type of person that gets a kick out of telling others what they should and shouldn't be feeling about something. That's not your job.

hunterm16a2:
They provide you a service, yet you question the way in which they give it.

Are you joking?

hunterm16a2:
This isn't worth responding to. Remember your thoughts the next time a peace officer tries to help your community. They provide you a service, yet you question the way in which they give it. Some day you may realize that police are here to help, and bad mouthing them AS A WHOLE will only dig your hole a little deeper. America is just as free as it always has been, you don't like it, find a new home.

Whenever I see that, the reprimand always comes to mind "Well, if you don't want to improve our living conditions, why don't you go find a new home? You're not being a very good home keeper if you don't take care of the messes."

Edit: It always amazes me when people get all pissed off thinking someone else is rocking the boat when really they are trying to bail the water out because the ship is taking on water. Man the bilge pump, don't claim the thing will stop sinking if the others jump out and go for a swim.

Edit2: Wasn't the supplier/producer of Tasers recently successfully sued for not informing law enforcement to that the use of multiple electric shocks can induce heart irregularities, leading to fatal cardiac arrest?

It would seem like this discussion is easily sidetracked. Regarding the game, I think it is a good (but a little deterministic) simulation of direct action with regards to the social/psychological mechanism that enables groups to handle (any kind of) brutality. I don't want to adress the 'law-and-order' crowd, since they just don't seem to get it. A good game, and a relevant topic it attempts to handle.

Any of you interested in uniting against: Brutality, propaganda, hunger, racism, child abuse, etc. We must work together to end religious intolerance, environmental destruction also!

I think, I talk, I act, I move to next mission!

Stay strong.

Did anyone else here the guy on the podium say, just before the police grab the guy, "It's alright, let me answer his question."?

So, essentially the police were going against the man in charge, am I right?

Quick observation : Next time a mod bans someone, does that mean all mods are corrupt or just that particular one?

AFAICT, one aggressive, potentially violent, agitator removed from a conference weighs out against a possible political assassination. Be it character, verbal or physical.

If Meyer had a point to make, there are far more viable ways to make it.

If the Government hadn't wanted you to see this, there are numerous ways they could have stopped this.

I am just disgusted that they took him out AFTER Kerry said that it was OK, and he would answer the question.
By the way, the mods in this case Root, would be Kerry, not the police, so the argument you are putting up should be "Next time an anonymous user bans someone, does that mean all mods are corrupt or just that particular one?"

dusparr:

By the way, the mods in this case Root, would be Kerry, not the police, so the argument you are putting up should be "Next time an anonymous user bans someone, does that mean all mods are corrupt or just that particular one?"

Unlikely, because anonymous users have no power, which the police surely have.

If we take Head Honcho here (which I'm not sure of) as Kerry, and have nilcypher(Sorry man, but you're the newest edition) as the Police, would HH be able to unban someone nil had banned?

And seriously, in that situation, your main response is to stop Meyer from hurting you, by ANY legal means. They may have been heavy-handed, but in that situation I probably would have done similar.

How many videos do we get to see of the Police doing their job normally though? There's a million of them out on the street everyday. You'd think they do something right occasionally.

But Kerry specifically said, "That's all right." "Let me answer his question.", so why would the Police, a group there for control purposes, remove him.
Yes HH would be able to unban, or rather, did not ban this person but the police did ban him. (sorry if this does not make sense I have not had sleep in 24 hours, so if I a m not clear please tell me I will attempt to be more clear)

In reality, I think the police deprived Kerry of a perfect oprotuninty to knock down his arguments, by making It seem like Kerry forced him off, When if I haeard Kerry right, It was the police's own inititive to do so.

This is all assuming, of course, that I am hearing, and therefore interpreting, what Kerry said properly.

After viewing countless videos of police brutality, I think I've finally figured out how the police cause people to *resist*. It seems to be an unofficial technique that some cops use to cause resistance which they can then use to to justify there brutality. I'm going to call this technique S.C.R.U.M. standing for

S=Smother the perpetrator (4-5 cops on top of the perpetrator so videos do not show what is going on nor can onlookers see)

C=Choke the perpetrator so he/she can't yell for help nor tell onlookers what is happening.

R=cause resistance by these methods:
1. Crush testicles causing severe pain
2. Crush kneecap causing severe pain
3. Twist ankle or knee in attempt to break joint

U=render victim Unconscious with TASER or via choking

M=Murder

The bald cop with his back to you can be seen squeezing and crushing the testicles of Deacon. Anyone would thrash around if someone did this to them.

Video of the murder of Deacon Frederick Williams, RIP
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=833329c647

AnteGravity:
You are not legally allowed to resist arrest nor removal from public places if it is obvious you are causing trouble like the idiot in the video. It is not legal to obstruct authorities from doing their job.

It was rather obvious he was being a loud, obnoxious ass and a big drama queen.

The animal video analogy was way off as well. You can't realistically compared a Predator-Prey relationship to a public-nuisance vs legal authority reaction.

The people who try to keep the peace already have it hard enough without the anti-rational, unpragmatic, sympathy-for-the-devil witch-hunters swooping in to spin every situation way out of proportion to make whatever agenda they fanatically espouse seem more digestible.

If only the energy and talents that wen6t into making the cop-hater game went into making a stop the robber. Trust me when I say that criminals won't treat you half as nice if you sit in a doorway blocking their exit.

That is what is funny with people. Criminals get more respect and glory then authorities because they are genuinely afraid of the former but feel they can get away with being stupid if the later have enough laws, lawyers, and red tape hamstringing them.

Hooray

Great, simple little game
i think you did well in reflecting how crowds behave in a very simplified dynamic.
As for all the rest well the 'Angry internet men' certainly latched onto this one.

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here