Swatting has become a lot more common than what some realize. What happened at the end of 2017 has finally seen justice get dispensed. Tyler Barriss is set to serve a 20 year sentence for an incident of swatting that led to the death of a man in Wichita, Kansas.
For a quick synopsis, two guys were arguing over a 1.50 bet in Call of Duty and Barriss decided to do some swatting and gave an address. Unfortunately, police shot and killed Andrew Finch, the victim of the prank who had no involvement with the game or the people involved. Just a bad situation that turned deadly. Combined with previous incidents and this, it's a surprise Barriss didn't get more time. Considering his past, this should hopefully set a precedent.
I read something that the Finch family was trying to get justice on the cops. I feel sorry for them, but these swattings typically involve saying that the person has done something very bad. As much as some would want to see cops have some restraint, when you hear about a man killing his father and looking to set his house on fire, what are they supposed to do? There are real life situations where that does occur. They can't take these false reports lightly because what if it was true? Honestly, cops are in lose lose situations, and this is one of those times where that was the case.
As far as the punishment fitting the crime, it is. I would hope it scares people, but I put serious doubt into that. Until then, it could go either way.
Sunday, March 31, 2019
Friday, March 29, 2019
Wednesday, March 27, 2019
Legally Egged Off
Some people either become notorious, infamous, or catch attention for something they do in public. Surely enough, the shootings at that mosque in New Zealand is a big tragedy in itself. Unfortunately, what happened a couple weeks ago is diminished by a 17 year old not too long after it that is embarrassing.
After the shooting, Australian lawmaker Fraser Anning blamed it on Muslims. About more than a week ago, he would later get egged by a teenager, Will Connolly. That would lead to a little altercation, the Internet praised the kid, who is 17 years old by the way, and a GoFundMe has been created to help him with legal issues.
This is the kind of person who should not be celebrated for doing something so stupid. And Connolly knew it was wrong, but decided to do it. We're not talking about 10 year old who gets a slap on the wrist. He is 17 and should be punished for his actions. He knew what he was doing and should not be heralded. What Anning said was awful as well, but the kid should have shown a bit of restraint. This stuff bites you when you're fresh out of high school.
Maybe jail time could happen. It would give Connolly time to clear up his head and learn that you don't do anything in public that hurts you that bad. There should be no sympathy for both him and Anning.
After the shooting, Australian lawmaker Fraser Anning blamed it on Muslims. About more than a week ago, he would later get egged by a teenager, Will Connolly. That would lead to a little altercation, the Internet praised the kid, who is 17 years old by the way, and a GoFundMe has been created to help him with legal issues.
This is the kind of person who should not be celebrated for doing something so stupid. And Connolly knew it was wrong, but decided to do it. We're not talking about 10 year old who gets a slap on the wrist. He is 17 and should be punished for his actions. He knew what he was doing and should not be heralded. What Anning said was awful as well, but the kid should have shown a bit of restraint. This stuff bites you when you're fresh out of high school.
Maybe jail time could happen. It would give Connolly time to clear up his head and learn that you don't do anything in public that hurts you that bad. There should be no sympathy for both him and Anning.
Tuesday, March 26, 2019
Switch Up, Pro and Mini?
Within the past two years, the Switch has been a hit for Nintendo. It has drawn a lot of companies to it and has gotten a lot of games and ports during it's short life so far. Now, there are speculations that they are looking to revise their hardware. In the past, they have been either very late to do it like the NES and SNES, or they have so many like their GBA and DS line. The potential to come out this year is a Mini and Pro edition of the Switch.
A Mini Switch makes a bit of sense. When the Game Boy came out in 1989, it was big but fit into your pocket. It was revised in 1996 with the Pocket. That was smaller, had more hours of battery life, and didn't use a dot matrix display. I could see it with the Switch. A better display, improved battery life are two things I can vision. The price will be my main concern. I would assume 200 to 250 dollars. There's no suggestion on a release date, but if they want to do some damage, getting it out this summer should be their goal.
A Pro Switch is something I'm trying to wrap my head around. Sure enough, you could with better chips in the hardware. How much of a boost will it be? PS4 and Xbox One have their own Pro editions that have more emphasis on 4K enhanced visuals for 4K television. If it can do at least early PS4 and Xbox One, then I'd see that as a win for Nintendo. It will be pricey, which is one of the things they are not known for. Prior to the 3DS, their console and portable systems were generally 100 to 250 depending on the system. Anything above 350 might be a death wish, but if it does come out this year, it's a matter of what to expect in terms of sales and what games benefit from it.
I think a revision is necessary for the Switch. Nintendo is making a right move. Can they stick to it and have them last a few years?
A Mini Switch makes a bit of sense. When the Game Boy came out in 1989, it was big but fit into your pocket. It was revised in 1996 with the Pocket. That was smaller, had more hours of battery life, and didn't use a dot matrix display. I could see it with the Switch. A better display, improved battery life are two things I can vision. The price will be my main concern. I would assume 200 to 250 dollars. There's no suggestion on a release date, but if they want to do some damage, getting it out this summer should be their goal.
A Pro Switch is something I'm trying to wrap my head around. Sure enough, you could with better chips in the hardware. How much of a boost will it be? PS4 and Xbox One have their own Pro editions that have more emphasis on 4K enhanced visuals for 4K television. If it can do at least early PS4 and Xbox One, then I'd see that as a win for Nintendo. It will be pricey, which is one of the things they are not known for. Prior to the 3DS, their console and portable systems were generally 100 to 250 depending on the system. Anything above 350 might be a death wish, but if it does come out this year, it's a matter of what to expect in terms of sales and what games benefit from it.
I think a revision is necessary for the Switch. Nintendo is making a right move. Can they stick to it and have them last a few years?
Sunday, March 24, 2019
The House of Fox and the Mouse
One blog I had in mind last year was this, but that was put on a back burner. With the news settled in on what happened March 20th, you'll understand. As of now, Fox is now owned by Disney. What seems like a funny joke from The Simpsons is now in reality. What exactly does this mean?
For well over a year, the idea of Fox being bought was there. Despite being around since 1935, they have had some huge movies the last 50 years. Alien, Porky's, Die Hard, Home Alone, Ice Age, Avatar. One offs like Point Break, Mrs. Doubtfire, M*A*S*H, The Towering Inferno, Titanic. So many movies. My suspicion on why there was a deal was so Disney could get the rest of the Marvel properties that Fox had. I honestly think that was their only reason just because they want that stupid cinematic universe garbage the way they envisioned it. I'm hearing they might try to reboot X-Men, which I think is a really bad idea. Turning those guys into the same low I.Q. popcorn flicks as the other adaptations will save some people time and not see them in theaters.
Fox has it's own network, and I believe they still have control of their own stuff. As far as own produced programs, I would assume it's under Disney. I really don't know. Within the last 15 years, the House of Mouse has mostly reverted back to being a company that's more so for kids. While that's been their moniker since its inception in the 1920s, they took chances 35 years ago with their Touchstone label. Stuff like Splash, Ruthless People, Roger Rabbit for fuck's sake. Without Roger, Spielberg doesn't do all those 90s cartoons. No Tiny Toon, no Animaniacs. It's why I have a little concern now for Fox.
You look at FX and FXX and the original stuff they have is R-rated type material. What will happen to Always Sunny? Or American Horror Story? Or even regular Fox? A lot of their big shows are TV-14 programs. I can't imagine Disney interfering that much or neutering them.
Disney got themselves out of a rut about 10 years ago and have been making more huge hits than duds. However, they don't take too many chances anymore. It could happen to Fox depending on the kind of projects that are made. I have a really bad feeling about the future of film and TV entertainment.
For well over a year, the idea of Fox being bought was there. Despite being around since 1935, they have had some huge movies the last 50 years. Alien, Porky's, Die Hard, Home Alone, Ice Age, Avatar. One offs like Point Break, Mrs. Doubtfire, M*A*S*H, The Towering Inferno, Titanic. So many movies. My suspicion on why there was a deal was so Disney could get the rest of the Marvel properties that Fox had. I honestly think that was their only reason just because they want that stupid cinematic universe garbage the way they envisioned it. I'm hearing they might try to reboot X-Men, which I think is a really bad idea. Turning those guys into the same low I.Q. popcorn flicks as the other adaptations will save some people time and not see them in theaters.
Fox has it's own network, and I believe they still have control of their own stuff. As far as own produced programs, I would assume it's under Disney. I really don't know. Within the last 15 years, the House of Mouse has mostly reverted back to being a company that's more so for kids. While that's been their moniker since its inception in the 1920s, they took chances 35 years ago with their Touchstone label. Stuff like Splash, Ruthless People, Roger Rabbit for fuck's sake. Without Roger, Spielberg doesn't do all those 90s cartoons. No Tiny Toon, no Animaniacs. It's why I have a little concern now for Fox.
You look at FX and FXX and the original stuff they have is R-rated type material. What will happen to Always Sunny? Or American Horror Story? Or even regular Fox? A lot of their big shows are TV-14 programs. I can't imagine Disney interfering that much or neutering them.
Disney got themselves out of a rut about 10 years ago and have been making more huge hits than duds. However, they don't take too many chances anymore. It could happen to Fox depending on the kind of projects that are made. I have a really bad feeling about the future of film and TV entertainment.
Friday, March 22, 2019
Thursday, March 21, 2019
Is 430 Million Too Much?
As the years have gone on, I think baseball has gotten more greedier and greedier. We're starting to see a handful of players getting paid more than 30 million a year to play 162 games. In the wake of this week's signing, I have no clue what the LA Angels are doing.
The teams main attraction is Mike Trout. He is one of the big faces for California baseball, California sports, and the MLB. Now, he possesses one of the biggest deals ever. It is a 12 year contract extension that is worth 430 million all together. That means Trout is with the Angels until 2030. Similar to Bryce Harper, he is set to play some of his prime years. It makes a lot of sense because he is one of the very few examples of a five tool player. An example of a good average, power, speed, arm strength, and fielding.
That being said, the Angels may not be learning from their mistake in 2012 when they signed Albert Pujols. But even with that, they got Pujols around the end of his prime and fresh off playing 11 years with St. Louis. Who knows what could happen to Trout. For all we know, he could keep putting up monster numbers. But that's all a guess. And a guess I'll have is how do they handle the contract and try and get players to Los Angeles to turn them into contenders. It makes sense to keep him around until his career ends. But can the Angels change their losing ways?
The big teams in California baseball have been the LA Dodgers and San Francisco. Oakland has slowly the last five years surprised the league with their success. If the Angels can look at the blueprints of those teams, then they can be smart with their decisions and piece together a team for Trout. If not, this will be a huge waste of talent with great stats but on a garbage team.
The teams main attraction is Mike Trout. He is one of the big faces for California baseball, California sports, and the MLB. Now, he possesses one of the biggest deals ever. It is a 12 year contract extension that is worth 430 million all together. That means Trout is with the Angels until 2030. Similar to Bryce Harper, he is set to play some of his prime years. It makes a lot of sense because he is one of the very few examples of a five tool player. An example of a good average, power, speed, arm strength, and fielding.
That being said, the Angels may not be learning from their mistake in 2012 when they signed Albert Pujols. But even with that, they got Pujols around the end of his prime and fresh off playing 11 years with St. Louis. Who knows what could happen to Trout. For all we know, he could keep putting up monster numbers. But that's all a guess. And a guess I'll have is how do they handle the contract and try and get players to Los Angeles to turn them into contenders. It makes sense to keep him around until his career ends. But can the Angels change their losing ways?
The big teams in California baseball have been the LA Dodgers and San Francisco. Oakland has slowly the last five years surprised the league with their success. If the Angels can look at the blueprints of those teams, then they can be smart with their decisions and piece together a team for Trout. If not, this will be a huge waste of talent with great stats but on a garbage team.
Wednesday, March 20, 2019
Sunday, March 17, 2019
The Bad Baseball Angel
I guess frustrations were mounting for Angel Hernandez. Not even into the season yet, but he must have had some reason for throwing out a manager. And that's what he did with Houston Astro manager A.J. Hinch. With Spring Training, not every game gets televised unless your favorite team is home or for specific reasons. As with a number of these incidents, it came down to balls and strikes favoritism.
I can't speak my views on unions, but MLB's umpiring union needs to be disbanded. Or at the very least, start punishing guys like Hernandez and Joe West more severely. I know it's pre-season, but something has to change. If not now, then when? How many more times does the country have to hear these guys blow a game and make the worst calls at the worst time? Hernandez was taken off the playoff crew in October for his obvious missed calls in the ALDS. The likelihood could happen again to anyone, but it could be a rarity.
The human element is something we can't ignore, but there's always someone to ruin that aspect. And unfortunately, the union allows them to keep umpiring. I won't say that every umpire needs to be accounted for their actions much like managers and players, but some blame has to be on them. At some point, someone is going to get sick of Hernandez and give him the boot. How much more will he do before he gets let go as an umpire?
I can't speak my views on unions, but MLB's umpiring union needs to be disbanded. Or at the very least, start punishing guys like Hernandez and Joe West more severely. I know it's pre-season, but something has to change. If not now, then when? How many more times does the country have to hear these guys blow a game and make the worst calls at the worst time? Hernandez was taken off the playoff crew in October for his obvious missed calls in the ALDS. The likelihood could happen again to anyone, but it could be a rarity.
The human element is something we can't ignore, but there's always someone to ruin that aspect. And unfortunately, the union allows them to keep umpiring. I won't say that every umpire needs to be accounted for their actions much like managers and players, but some blame has to be on them. At some point, someone is going to get sick of Hernandez and give him the boot. How much more will he do before he gets let go as an umpire?
Saturday, March 16, 2019
Jackson: Naysayers and Bandwagons
Do note that I have no intentions of watching the documentary and am expressing my thoughts about the reviews and aftermath. Now, I think there's a part of the world that wanted Michael Jackson in jail a long time ago. There's no sugarcoating that. But the thing is, we will never know if he truly molested kids. We can only rely on what people have said. As it stands, the two sides who think he either did it or not did it will be at each other for a long time, but a lot of people believe the alleged victims.
In the wake of the Leaving Neverland documentary, stances on certain Hollywood celebrities has changed. The Simpsons has decided to ban their season 3 episode with him for good, which I think is a pure overreaction. Some radio stations have stopped playing songs. The fact that Dan Reed didn't bother to ask defenders like Macaulay Culkin, who was critical to the 2005 trial, shows a clear bias and one sided affair. I don't get it. I really don't. As I said in the earlier blog about this, Jackson can't defend himself since he's been dead for almost 10 years. What's the point? Where's the evidence that isn't people that say they were molested? Stuff like doctor's reports or anything? I'm not a crime expert, never will be. But if it didn't work the first or second time, why the hell would it work a third time?
With the way things are, Jackson's legacy is tarnished by this. How much of it, I'm not sure. But the documentary was not a critical darling at all. As a critics' standpoint, it's well regarded, but some of them were not going to let Reed off easily. Of course, you got outside of it, people who will love it and hate it. Was it creepy for Jackson to have stuff like this? Yes. But basing it on what two alleged victims said is not enough to instantly have different stances. As I said not too long ago, I'm not the hugest fan of Jackson. This, however, is trying to favor one side where the other side can't do anything about it because of the bias.
If it was for a quick buck, Reed should be ashamed of himself. As I said, I can't form an opinion on whether Jackson molested kids or not. An interview is not going to change on me being neutral. This will end ugly in some way. As for the alleged victims, if I were them, I would want to be in hiding for a while until all this dies out because of the reception from both sides. Those two are going to have their heads on plenty of people's plates. Until then, expect a lot of hell for a good while.
In the wake of the Leaving Neverland documentary, stances on certain Hollywood celebrities has changed. The Simpsons has decided to ban their season 3 episode with him for good, which I think is a pure overreaction. Some radio stations have stopped playing songs. The fact that Dan Reed didn't bother to ask defenders like Macaulay Culkin, who was critical to the 2005 trial, shows a clear bias and one sided affair. I don't get it. I really don't. As I said in the earlier blog about this, Jackson can't defend himself since he's been dead for almost 10 years. What's the point? Where's the evidence that isn't people that say they were molested? Stuff like doctor's reports or anything? I'm not a crime expert, never will be. But if it didn't work the first or second time, why the hell would it work a third time?
With the way things are, Jackson's legacy is tarnished by this. How much of it, I'm not sure. But the documentary was not a critical darling at all. As a critics' standpoint, it's well regarded, but some of them were not going to let Reed off easily. Of course, you got outside of it, people who will love it and hate it. Was it creepy for Jackson to have stuff like this? Yes. But basing it on what two alleged victims said is not enough to instantly have different stances. As I said not too long ago, I'm not the hugest fan of Jackson. This, however, is trying to favor one side where the other side can't do anything about it because of the bias.
If it was for a quick buck, Reed should be ashamed of himself. As I said, I can't form an opinion on whether Jackson molested kids or not. An interview is not going to change on me being neutral. This will end ugly in some way. As for the alleged victims, if I were them, I would want to be in hiding for a while until all this dies out because of the reception from both sides. Those two are going to have their heads on plenty of people's plates. Until then, expect a lot of hell for a good while.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)