Which are these from? I think I recognize one character, and I don't even remember from where.

Nuclear-Spearman: Huuuun, where's my atl-atl?!?

Honey: I put it away! Don't you think about running off doing no nuclear-do!

I'm disagreeing with your statement that "you're only allowed to use deadly force in proportional response," not with whether this case is being prosecuted rightly or not.

Mate, read that link I put in there. I can tell you, from experience, that if you shoot at someone stealing your property in Texas, where that penal code I posted is from, that exact portion of the statute is going to be used and you will not be convicted. It really is "anyone could have a gun or knife." At least Texas has it so just theft has to be during the nighttime, so I guess that's something.

You'll also get similar worded statutes in many other states in the US, several of which, stating this again, where I've had the misfortune of having to research those laws. And that "reasonable belief" part about exposing yourself to risk of serious bodily injury or death? I have seen it applied to people who are simply physically larger than you. Proportional response is a moot concept.

I can't remember the name of the book now, but in high school we read a 'true' story of child abuse. I'm sure it was edited to both tone down and turn up certain elements, but it was pretty much a brutal shock to people who are mostly from decent families that love them. Whether the kids were rich, poor, or middle class in my school, just about everyone there could at least return home to parents that didn't commit those horrors.

I remember the diapers, the exposure to the elements, and the way the other children were pitted against the abused kid, and honestly? It was the emotional abuse that was the worst to read.

Sorry, but that's not exactly right, because in several areas, the prevention of death or great bodily harm also includes the scenario where if you were to attempt to reclaim control over your property, you would be putting yourself in those same risk categories. See 9.42 (3)(B) here, where I have had the misfortune of having to research the law before. In other words, if you think the person is stealing your stuff and could harm you if you try to recover said stuff... well, you're 'legally' allowed to start blasting.

I'm not sure about the exact laws where the incident occurred, but in several other states that I know the law of, aggravated assault carries the exact same penalties as attempted murder. Because of the wording of the two laws, aggravated assault is much easier to prove. If you're a prosecutor, why would you not go with the easier to prove, exact same penalty crime?

You won't be. If I remember correctly, and I shudder at the memories, you'll have anthropomorphized versions of the seven sins. Be warned, All hope abandon ye who enter here.

That's what the beer hat is for.

Hades and Isaac are surprising. They're both old enough that I would have thought they wouldn't be flush with players right now. The fallout stuff makes sense, given its fanbase and the show's influence. I wonder if I should go back and try to 100% either of them now...

Bird dogs don't kill the game birds. They retrieve them. It's why there are entire breeds called retrievers. Some other bird dogs flush the birds so you can shoot them in the air, preserving your so called "sportsmanlike" ways.

You'd be amazed how many people learn the hard way that they first need to head to a separate store to buy a gas container, then head to the gas station. Most places could care less about keeping a container on premises because it is both a rare situation these days, and storage is at a premium in most stores. If you saw the back room or manager's office, you would see the floor-to-ceiling stacks of inventory (usually drinks or tobacco products).

Huh. The funeral isn't far off from reality, but all I can hear for the other two are really weird sounding sad tracks.