Batman AA is a great game. Arkham City is coming out in late 2011. The trailer is awesome:
YouTube - Batman: Arkham City 'Hugo Strange Trailer' TRUE-HD QUALITY
DAO and COD are both good as well.
UC chat (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Trollhole
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Batman AA is a great game. Arkham City is coming out in late 2011. The trailer is awesome:
YouTube - Batman: Arkham City 'Hugo Strange Trailer' TRUE-HD QUALITY
DAO and COD are both good as well.
Only In Clemson...
Best line:
Chief Jimmy Dixon says the man yelled "go" and darted into oncoming traffic in the four-lane highway.
Article:
Cops: Man playing real-life 'Frogger' hit by SUV
Authorities said the 23-year-old man was taken to a hospital in Anderson after he was struck at around 9 p.m. Monday.
In the "Frogger" arcade game, players move frogs through traffic on a busy road and through a hazard-filled river. Before he was hit, police say the man had been discussing the game with his friends.
Chief Jimmy Dixon says the man yelled "go" and darted into oncoming traffic in the four-lane highway.
No charges are expected against the driver. The name of the man who was struck has not been released. He was in stable condition Monday night.
Best line:
Chief Jimmy Dixon says the man yelled "go" and darted into oncoming traffic in the four-lane highway.
Article:
Cops: Man playing real-life 'Frogger' hit by SUV
- – 1 hr 37 mins ago
Authorities said the 23-year-old man was taken to a hospital in Anderson after he was struck at around 9 p.m. Monday.
In the "Frogger" arcade game, players move frogs through traffic on a busy road and through a hazard-filled river. Before he was hit, police say the man had been discussing the game with his friends.
Chief Jimmy Dixon says the man yelled "go" and darted into oncoming traffic in the four-lane highway.
No charges are expected against the driver. The name of the man who was struck has not been released. He was in stable condition Monday night.
I also want to play castlevania lords of shadow but i have to save some $ for cruiser. I need to have a quarter panel replaced before the one i have laying around rusts out. I am tired of riding around with it in the back of the cruiser
jfz80
Cruisin’
VERY COOL and GREAT JOB on Cox's mural Marshall. I got to see the ones in Durham and NCSU with some art an architectures tours with the school of design. Im sure he is smiling down on the Troll
I don't understand why they use these developed movies with absolutely no game-play to sell games to kids. False advertisement at it's best.
Jeremy
Jeremy
- Thread starter
- #306
Troll i think you should get one of those for GSMTR 
- Thread starter
- #308
MMMM. That would be really cool but I think a lot of us wouldn't make it back to the sleeping bag. I could easily see myself passed out somewhere around the pond from a night of that thing.
- Thread starter
- #309
You are probably right. I guess it wouldnt take this crowd long before we thought it was a good idea to see if we could drink 40 beers in a minute.
Anyone got any experience with Saturns? Particularly the DOHC 1.9? My commuter has a load dependent knock at about 2-5k RPM and it's not in the timing gear or valve train. Probably going to tear the oil pan off next week and look into it, but wanted to see if anyone had a potential source for the problem.
mmm, beer is good. that is all.
Southeast Overland
Get lost! Go explore!
- Thread starter
- #314
Hey STeve what is this I hear about deer season being limited? Is there any truth to it?
Isn't Upstate limited to 5, but they really don't have a way of enforcing it.
Jeremy
Jeremy
Southeast Overland
Get lost! Go explore!
Whatchu talkin' 'bout Willis? # deer? Season start/end?
- Thread starter
- #317
Here it is.
Hunters Request Change to South Carolina Deer Management | Big Game Hunt
y: South Carolina Dept of Natural Resources
Posted on: 12/22/10
Send to friend Printer-friendly version Share/Save
South Carolina deer hunters are asking for changes to the state's deer management approach based on public opinion data gathered by the S.C. Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
Much of the discussion among hunters is related to concern over the unregulated harvest of antlered bucks, and an estimated 25 percent decline in the State's deer population over the last 10 years according to DNR biologists. Currently there is no enforceable limit on the number of bucks a hunter can take during the season.
Public meetings, mail surveys, and more recently telephone and internet based surveys of the state's deer hunters indicate that a minimum of 70 percent of hunters support the concept of a reasonable limit on antlered bucks and the implementation of a tagging program that would provide for enforcement of such a limit.
Additionally, a minimum of 70 percent of hunters indicate that they would support paying a modest fee to implement such a tagging program as long as the fee was used to administer the program and for deer research and management. A complete summary of DNR's efforts to document public opinion on future deer management can be found online.
DNR's governing board has discussed this issue on numerous occasions this year, and at the Dec. 17, 2010 DNR Board meeting voted to support a statewide limit of 4 bucks per hunter per year, and a mandatory deer tagging program whereby all harvested deer (bucks and does) must be tagged at the point of kill with tags provided by the department. A nominal fee of $5 per tag for residents and $25 per tag for nonresidents is proposed.
Although DNR can make recommendations, any changes to the current deer hunting laws require action by the South Carolina General Assembly. The DNR Board proposal will be incorporated into the DNR's
Hunters Request Change to South Carolina Deer Management | Big Game Hunt
y: South Carolina Dept of Natural Resources
Posted on: 12/22/10
Send to friend Printer-friendly version Share/Save
South Carolina deer hunters are asking for changes to the state's deer management approach based on public opinion data gathered by the S.C. Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
Much of the discussion among hunters is related to concern over the unregulated harvest of antlered bucks, and an estimated 25 percent decline in the State's deer population over the last 10 years according to DNR biologists. Currently there is no enforceable limit on the number of bucks a hunter can take during the season.
Public meetings, mail surveys, and more recently telephone and internet based surveys of the state's deer hunters indicate that a minimum of 70 percent of hunters support the concept of a reasonable limit on antlered bucks and the implementation of a tagging program that would provide for enforcement of such a limit.
Additionally, a minimum of 70 percent of hunters indicate that they would support paying a modest fee to implement such a tagging program as long as the fee was used to administer the program and for deer research and management. A complete summary of DNR's efforts to document public opinion on future deer management can be found online.
DNR's governing board has discussed this issue on numerous occasions this year, and at the Dec. 17, 2010 DNR Board meeting voted to support a statewide limit of 4 bucks per hunter per year, and a mandatory deer tagging program whereby all harvested deer (bucks and does) must be tagged at the point of kill with tags provided by the department. A nominal fee of $5 per tag for residents and $25 per tag for nonresidents is proposed.
Although DNR can make recommendations, any changes to the current deer hunting laws require action by the South Carolina General Assembly. The DNR Board proposal will be incorporated into the DNR's
Southeast Overland
Get lost! Go explore!
<rant on>
I'm all for quality deer management but am generally not for another government regulatory program. We already have doe tags that we pay for ($5 each) that allow you to harvest does outside of set doe days. We already pay our license fees every year. The SCDNR has had it's budget drastically cut over the past 5 or so years, maybe 10 years which compounds the problem.
My gut instinct is there are those who harvest over the legal limit but implementing an additional cost/fees/programs will only impact those like me who already adhere to the law and won't do squat for those who harvest deer over the limit b/c those people probably process their own deer so there isn't anyone involved to check the tags. Will all deer now have to be registered after they are harvested? Who will do that and fund that?
I rarely ever see Game Wardens in the woods so there basically isn't anyone available in the field to enforce these potential new laws. In 27 years of hunting I've seen 2 game wardens checking licenses, etc in the field - one was when I was about 10 and dove hunting and another was when I was about 10 and fishing in the cove behind my parents house. That makes about 21 years when I haven't run into a Game Warden.
I don't see how this will have any measurable effect on limiting over harvesting of deer. All I see is an additional fee/tax on those who already follow the law.
Here is a little story for ya. About 3 or 4 years ago I was hunting my favorite food plot. Anyone who is Facebook friends with me has probably seen plenty of pictures of this spot. I took a nice doe (dropped her in the field) and about a minute after the shot or less I was unloading my weapon and then on the phone with my mom telling her I would be back to her house later than usual when a smaller doe (ended up being a button buck) walked into the field. The deer had not been scared off by the first shot and couldn't have been more than 50 feet or so off the field when I shot and probably much closer. I loaded a round, which was not quiet, and shot that deer. When I got to the second deer I could tell something was not right. The hind quarters was swollen and STUNK. I loaded up the deer and opened up the rear quarter of the second deer at my grandfather's skinning rack. Someone had shot this deer in the a$$ probably two to three days prior, maybe four days. It was the second morning of deer season so someone took a VERY VERY poor shot at this deer before primary weapons season was open. The shot was so poor that I only recovered a copper jacket and no lead core. This means that someone took a shot at the deer's a$$ through brush (bad bad idea). Now I'm not a betting man but I'd have to bet that no matter what sort of additional regulation you place on hunters this situation still would have happened and will continue to happen.
I see plenty of deer walking out of my favorite food plot at night when I'm using a Surefire light. I saw a big buck two years ago like this about 30 yards off. It just stood there and looked at me in the light. I could have easily taken a ten point or better buck but it was against the law and I didn't. Many would have taken the buck and no additional regulation or fee would have stopped that from happening.
It's just like a state starting to charge a OHV vehicle fee to drive on FS roads to repair damage done by individuals who drive illegal roads and trails on public land. I betcha the illegal wheelers aren't buying the permits and the legal wheelers are having to cough up additional money.
ETA: These schmucks are already breaking the law - so why would implementing an additional law with a fee/tax make them now comply? It will only give them more reason not to comply. Increasing the cost of compliance increases the incentive not to comply - Econ 101.
</rant off>
I'm all for quality deer management but am generally not for another government regulatory program. We already have doe tags that we pay for ($5 each) that allow you to harvest does outside of set doe days. We already pay our license fees every year. The SCDNR has had it's budget drastically cut over the past 5 or so years, maybe 10 years which compounds the problem.
My gut instinct is there are those who harvest over the legal limit but implementing an additional cost/fees/programs will only impact those like me who already adhere to the law and won't do squat for those who harvest deer over the limit b/c those people probably process their own deer so there isn't anyone involved to check the tags. Will all deer now have to be registered after they are harvested? Who will do that and fund that?
I rarely ever see Game Wardens in the woods so there basically isn't anyone available in the field to enforce these potential new laws. In 27 years of hunting I've seen 2 game wardens checking licenses, etc in the field - one was when I was about 10 and dove hunting and another was when I was about 10 and fishing in the cove behind my parents house. That makes about 21 years when I haven't run into a Game Warden.
I don't see how this will have any measurable effect on limiting over harvesting of deer. All I see is an additional fee/tax on those who already follow the law.
Here is a little story for ya. About 3 or 4 years ago I was hunting my favorite food plot. Anyone who is Facebook friends with me has probably seen plenty of pictures of this spot. I took a nice doe (dropped her in the field) and about a minute after the shot or less I was unloading my weapon and then on the phone with my mom telling her I would be back to her house later than usual when a smaller doe (ended up being a button buck) walked into the field. The deer had not been scared off by the first shot and couldn't have been more than 50 feet or so off the field when I shot and probably much closer. I loaded a round, which was not quiet, and shot that deer. When I got to the second deer I could tell something was not right. The hind quarters was swollen and STUNK. I loaded up the deer and opened up the rear quarter of the second deer at my grandfather's skinning rack. Someone had shot this deer in the a$$ probably two to three days prior, maybe four days. It was the second morning of deer season so someone took a VERY VERY poor shot at this deer before primary weapons season was open. The shot was so poor that I only recovered a copper jacket and no lead core. This means that someone took a shot at the deer's a$$ through brush (bad bad idea). Now I'm not a betting man but I'd have to bet that no matter what sort of additional regulation you place on hunters this situation still would have happened and will continue to happen.
I see plenty of deer walking out of my favorite food plot at night when I'm using a Surefire light. I saw a big buck two years ago like this about 30 yards off. It just stood there and looked at me in the light. I could have easily taken a ten point or better buck but it was against the law and I didn't. Many would have taken the buck and no additional regulation or fee would have stopped that from happening.
It's just like a state starting to charge a OHV vehicle fee to drive on FS roads to repair damage done by individuals who drive illegal roads and trails on public land. I betcha the illegal wheelers aren't buying the permits and the legal wheelers are having to cough up additional money.
ETA: These schmucks are already breaking the law - so why would implementing an additional law with a fee/tax make them now comply? It will only give them more reason not to comply. Increasing the cost of compliance increases the incentive not to comply - Econ 101.
</rant off>
Last edited:
damn, that's some incredible detail
