morbid

When I got my first air rifle with scope I realised that when using the scope your eye is not placed right up against it. You can see outside around the scope as well as the magnified view. Maybe we could have something similar in flashpoint 2, like this: Its not a particularly important feature but I think it would be a nice touch if it is possible to do this.

When its night, and there is an intruder in your home you I seriously doubt you will have much time to determine if the intruder is a threat or not. If I encounter an intruder in my home who isn't in the act of escaping (ie, is in an room with no exit, or is making no attempt to exit) then I most certainly WILL NOT stop to ask "pardon me Mr.Burglar sir, but are you a threat to me?". It is a chance not worth taking, in my opinion it is far better to put him down then ask questions than to take the chance that he his going to beat/stab/shoot the hell out of you. Despite the fact we cannot have firearms in the UK there are many household implements with which to render an assailant incapable of harming you. On the other hand if he is already half way out of a window well just let him go - actually no , give him a helping hand, I live one up so a push should help him find the ground .

A true tale, I'm afraid I'm the only source (aside from my parents of course). When I was young, very young - around 5 maybe or 6 years old someone broke into our house. At the time my sister and I shared a room, she was probably around 3. My dad (from whom I heard of this incident) heard a noise and entered our room. Now this room was on the bottom floor and our house was an old tenement type thing with flimsy windows with weak iron frames. Someone had forced the window open, went from my room in to the front room and attempted to steal various items, when my dad came into my room after hearing the noise he saw this person exiting through the room window. From the way he tells this I honestly believe he would have been sent to jail for murder or manslaughter if he had caught the intruder before he left. Such is the protectivenes of parents when their children are in potential danger. (please take my word for it when I say my dad is not a violent person, but this would have tipped him over the edge I think) I wonder, how many of you Americans keep firearms at home for this very reason? What would you have done if you found an intruder in your home as your young children and your wife slept nearby?

• In 1973 a young man running on a road at night was stopped by the police and found to be carrying a length of steel, a cycle chain, and a metal clock weight. He explained that a gang of youths had been after him. At his hearing it was found he had been threatened and had previously notified the police. The justices agreed he had a valid reason to carry the weapons. Indeed, 16 days later he was attacked and beaten so badly he was hospitalized. But the prosecutor appealed the ruling, and the appellate judges insisted that carrying a weapon must be related to an imminent and immediate threat. They sent the case back to the lower court with directions to convict. • In 1987 two men assaulted Eric Butler, a 56-year-old British Petroleum executive, in a London subway car, trying to strangle him and smashing his head against the door. No one came to his aid. He later testified, "My air supply was being cut off, my eyes became blurred, and I feared for my life." In desperation he unsheathed an ornamental sword blade in his walking stick and slashed at one of his attackers, stabbing the man in the stomach. The assailants were charged with wounding. Butler was tried and convicted of carrying an offensive weapon. • In 1994 an English homeowner, armed with a toy gun, managed to detain two burglars who had broken into his house while he called the police. When the officers arrived, they arrested the homeowner for using an imitation gun to threaten or intimidate. In a similar incident the following year, when an elderly woman fired a toy cap pistol to drive off a group of youths who were threatening her, she was arrested for putting someone in fear. Now the police are pressing Parliament to make imitation guns illegal. source : http://www.wmsa.net/pubs/reason/reason_nov02_crime_in_uk.htm

I'm sure some of you have heard about the case of the farmer here in the uk who was jailed for 5 years for shooting 2 burglars who had repeatedly robbed his farm. He encountered them one dark night and shot them both - likely out of fear, I certainly would have been scared of two intruders, in my property at night. I've also heard of (but can't confirm) that an older man (~60?) was charged with possesing an offensive weapon. The man happened to be carrying an ornamental sword when he was attacked. As far as I know he ran his attacker through with it. I'm pretty sure he did not take the sword outside with the intention of using it, it was likely he was merely transporting it. In the UK you are not allowed to defend yourself. I'm not a strong person. If I am (and I have been) attacked my only defense is to run but I can no longer run due to an arthritic condition in my foot. Therefore I can no longer defend myself (unless there happens to be a useful implement nearby, or the attacker is particularly feeble). You people in the US are lucky in that you are allowed to defend yourself with nessecary force (gun - if nessecary) In the uk I can't even carry a pocket knife for self defense, I don't know if CS spray is legal and I certainly cannot carry a gun. note - I don't actually fear walking on the streets (well not every street, there are some that I will not walk at night), crime rate isn't isn't bad but should a person become a victim of crime they have but one defense - their fists, or speed (ie run) because the police won't be there to defend you - they are there to pick up the pieces and investigate AFTER the crime.

When the helicopter comes at you head on shoot it with an rpg. After a bit of practice you should be able to hit it fairly easily. It usually takes 2 hits but sometimes one is enough.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hmm, I believe that in the US, we can buy ANY firearm/gun we want. As long as you are 21, and in any decent state with relaxed gun laws, and have enough money/patience. <span id='postcolor'> We don't all live in the US

Cloned humans would be just as human as you or I so any notion of organ harvesting is really out of the question. I did once (not sure if it was true) read that a frog was created with no central nervous system, it was basically a live body containing organs but with no brain. It would probably be easier to remove the genetic code that allows a human brain to form, than to extract all the seperate parts need to grow individual organs outside a body. but... I don't really like the idea of trying to create engineered humans with no brains for organ harvesting. Its just.....wierd. I have heard of one case though were a baby was born naturally lacking all but the most basic part of the brain - the brain stem, so it is possible for such a body to live. It was (in my opinion) a very sad and horrible case.

Nature is nothing but a process which evolves new creatures and allows those which are no longer viable to be destroyed. The goal of any life is simply to continue to exist by reproducing, there is nothing sacred about it. Most animals I know of (even humans to an extent) are at the prime of their life when they reach reproductive age. The grow up, reproduce and from then on its all downhill until they die (some spiders are even devoured immediately by their offspring). Why is this? Reproduction brings change and variety in a species, the old are replaced with the new. The new are hopefully strong. If they are not then they die. Mankind is unique on earth in that we are no longer constrained to these simple goals. We can go beyond this and manipulate nature to create better things. Want rice that grows in desert? Make it with geneitc engineering. Want something that tastes like a cow but can live in drie arid regions like a camel? Engineer it. If genetic engineering is applied properly, not left in the hands of greedy corporations then it would be possible to create foods which would vastly aid poorer nations - if it was not left to greedy corporations who would rather profit than help. Selective breeding was and is used to produce animals and plants which are better, genetic engineering could speed this up. Why shouldn't we manipulate nature, why should we not be allowed to IMPROVE upon nature? Yes, mistakes will be made but mistakes are there to be learned from. If people simply don't do something because they are afraid of what might go wrong they will never learn. (edited due to spelling/grammer mistakes - disgraceful considering English is my first langauge )

what would be good is if they could come up with a way of cloning individual organs. Need a kidney? Grow a new one identical to your own (except perfectly healthy). Heart disease? Grow a new heart (with the disease genes removed). Thats one good reason for research into cloning. But I don't believe it should ever go as far as cloning an entire human, theres simply no good reason for that other than to see if it works - which is not much of a reason at all.

If mankind always took the "We're not supposed to do that" attitude we'd still be stuck in the stone age. Besides, you can't learn anything if you refuse to try something. On the subject of right and wrong: What is morally right and wrong is decided by humans anyway. It is subject to change and has changed over the years. After all, it was once considered right by religious peoples to execute (in some suitably hideous way) non-believers such as me. In fact, in some places it is still considered right to stone a women to death for adultry - it is more wrong to be unfaithul than it is to kill? No way, but it does show that the moral values of human beings all over the world are NOT the same and do change. So what makes you all think that mankind will still have the same moral values 100 years from now? (I've gone horribly off-topic haven't I, sorry...)

While I do think cloning humans is wrong 9there is little reason for it, if any at all ) I do believe genetic research is extremely improtant. It's quite possible that sometime in the future it will be possible to eliminate many conditions a person might be genticly predisposed to before birth. This elimination of such conditions is far better than simply aborting an embryo because it has such a condition, is it not? Genetic manipulation could perhaps even eventually be used to eliminate less threatening conditions such as poor eyesight. I would much rather have I had my eyesight corrected before I was born with a little gene therapy or something than have to wait till my cataracts turns me blind when I'm 40.

Here in the UK OFP:GOTY can be found for Å29.99, quite a bargain considering that to buy ofp, redhammer and resistance seperately originally cost nearly Å60. so the game of the year edition seems the obvious choice as it is no more expensive than your average just released game but includes ofp and all the expansions.

Perhaps its cheaper to drop a single laser guided bomb onto a target than to drop a whole lot of unguided bombs in the area of the target in order to hit. Taking into account not just the cost of the bombs but also the increased fuel load needed when carrying the larger load of unguided bombs, increased flight time due to heavier load and so on... (I do not know if that is true, just a possible reason, after all once the initial research and prototyping has been done I suspect advanced weapons can be made reasonably cheaply in large quantities).

Try one of the user made campaigns. I'm playing through a delta force campaign just now (can't remember what its called though) and its quite good. Also, I installed the Dynamic Range sound pack and it seems to give the game a whole new feel. I also suggest trying 2 (or more) player lan coops (if you have access to a 2nd computer) - great fun.