Soxbadger

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 14, 2012 -> 03:12 PM) You can't make that assumption because people will still end up killing people, they'll just do it a different way. This line of argument works both ways. You cant make the assumption that this tragedy would have occurred today even if there were no guns. It may have happened, it could have been OKC, but its an assumption on both sides.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 14, 2012 -> 03:04 PM) I understand your point it's too easy to obtain that way, and it should be made harder, but it also highlights that these people are ignoring the laws anyway. The problem is that people respond to this with the "if we restrict it, then only people who follow the laws will be restricted." You need to take into account that criminals live in the same world as we do, and if something is easier for a non-criminal to get, it is also easier for a criminal to get. Its not like when your a criminal you get a special circular in the mail where you can order illegal items. Even when you have years of connections it can be hard to get exactly what you want on at a moments notice. To use the earlier example, if I wanted alcohol or cocaine and I was a criminal, alcohol would be millions of times easier.

Balta, Plane could crash into your house. Never know what will happen, might as well live your life and hope for the best.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 14, 2012 -> 03:04 PM) You can legally obtain it, but you CANNOT legally bring it into Chicago, nor can you legally register it...so no, it's not false...you just didn't read my entire post. I read your correction, but I wanted to clearly destroy that myth. When I read through the thread it truly is shocking how many people 1) dont even know the laws and 2) think that they have some great understanding of criminal behavior when they themselves are not really criminals. Strange Sox, I meant that people who claim you cant control guns. People who claim you can do use that argument.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 14, 2012 -> 02:38 PM) And I repeat, those were NOT obtained legally. Handguns cannot be sold in Chicago, or registered in Chicago. Thus, anyone with a handgun in Chicago that is not a law enforcement official obtained it illegally and did not register it...illegally. This once again is false. You can legally obtain the gun. If I have the proper permit in Texas, I could go to Texas and buy a gun that is not legal in IL. Therefore I legally obtained the gun. This is the problem. If you have X city where you cant buy pistols, but Y city next door, you just go to Y city to buy them. You keep bringing up drugs, but that is just a false equivalency. Illegal drugs are harder to obtain than legal drugs. When I was a kid and wanted drugs I needed to find a dealer, hope he was legit, hope he didnt rip me off, etc, etc. When I was a kid and wanted alcohol I simply stole it from a store or a parent. If guns are legal in any sense, they are easier for criminals to get. Every person who is a criminal understands this. Especially because smart criminals have accomplices who can buy the guns legally and then give it to the other person. Its not a very difficult system when the item you want is legal and its simply how to obtain it. It is actually much harder to get something off the black market. And the other part that no one wants to mention is that guns are very sophisticated tools to create. You cant just grow a gun in a forest. You cant cook up a batch of guns in an rv. They take factories, they take raw materials that can be traced. QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 14, 2012 -> 02:52 PM) IIRC the vast majority of prohibition alcohol was smuggled in, not made in bathtubs. The same would happen with guns. Ok so fine, maybe you make a dent on the random killings (which are still rare and random) but you're not stopping these major tragedies. You really dont know that. If this guy could not have gotten a weapon, maybe he doesnt kill anyone. You have to acknowledge the fact that all of the criminals who will easily obtain guns on the black market, are generally not buying them so they can commit a mass murder. They are buying them for criminal enterprise, so their entire system is to keep it unknown. The last thing you want is some guy taking your black market gun and killing 30 children. You will be caught. That is another part of the black market, sellers dont just sell to anyone. They arent going to risk hundreds of thousands of dollars of business on a single weapon sale.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2012 -> 01:49 PM) It is just one of those things that shouldn't be done in the heat of the moment. Why ruin someone else's life potentially? I agree completely.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2012 -> 01:46 PM) But it obviously isn't the shooter if he is updating his facebook page. Another person could have access to his account. But this is exactly why I am a ghost online. Even though there are only maybe 3 people in the entire world with my name, 0 if you include middle name. Which is also why I am not online, to easy to find things about me.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 14, 2012 -> 01:43 PM) You just can't take it anywhere but your home (for now). Once again not true. You can legally transport your gun, you just cant have it loaded on the street. If we are going to make comparisons and have a legitimate discussion, at least start with a factual framework that is correct. You can own a gun in Chicago. Saying its "illegal" is at best mistaken, at worst is a flat out lie to try and perpetrate a myth.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Dec 14, 2012 -> 01:41 PM) interesting Japan guns are legal, low killing rate Chicago guns are illegal, murder capital of the world This statement is patently false. You can legally own a gun in Chicago.

This is going to sound cold as hell, but if you want to live in a free society, you are going to have to accept that there are going to be body counts for that freedom. Even if we were to ban every gun, it would not stop people from murdering each other. I often think about how amazing it is that we have so few of these incidents given how easy it is to kill people in modern society. There is no answer, and if we are going to look at the 2nd amendment, it should be cold and heartless, not on the back of an extreme tragedy. Emotion makes for bad laws.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Dec 14, 2012 -> 12:30 PM) Even then it wouldn't be enough. "How hey old man security guard manning the metal detector. POP!" Well, there goes stopping the person at the front door. Exactly, it would give advanced warning so maybe only a few people were killed as opposed to 27. Have you ever been to the Daley Center on the day where they show all the weapons they confiscated the previous year? Its pretty insane to see that people tried to get through metal detectors with half a dozen police around armed. If they are willing to try it with those odds, nothing is really going to completely deter them.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 14, 2012 -> 12:28 PM) I didnt mean school since I am 31 and dont take classes. But in general, like a mall or something. We are at the mercy of crazy armed people in those situations. As I said previously, unless you plan on installing metal detectors in every single public place, you are never going to stop this type of violence. And even once you have metal detectors, you will simply have criminals who figure out other ways to kill people. If you are willing to kill yourself, you really just dont care. We are not talking about rational individuals who are trying to calculate whether they can get away with it or not.

Once pandora's box is open, there is no going back. Outside of metal detectors in every school, public building, etc, there is no real way to stop this type of crime. You can potentially limit the death count, but you cant stop it.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 14, 2012 -> 12:16 PM) I dont want to get political but honestly this is what makes me want concealed carry, if this happens to me in a public place I would like to shoot back. Im pretty sure that you wont be able to bring a gun into a school regardless. Yeah according to this site, http://www.usacarry.com/connecticut_concea...nformation.html it is illegal to have a cc in an elementary school. These are the Conn. exceptions: Places off-limits when carrying: 1. A permit to carry is required to carry a handgun outside one’s home (even though one may still be on his own property) or in any place of business in which one is merely an employee, not an owner or operator. A permit is also required to transport a handgun back and forth between one’s home and place of business, or to and from a range for target shooting. 2. It is unlawful to possess a firearm on public or private elementary or secondary school property. This prohibition shall not apply to a person with a firearm carrying permit, with permission from school officials, or while traversing school property with an unloaded firearm for the purpose of gaining access to lands open to hunting or for other lawful purposes, provided entry is not prohibited by school officials. Most states allow CC.

Temple may need a coach, but no one is going to start the rumor, Golden back to Temple.

Who knows, I suspect the coach will be named on a day Im not even paying attention at this point.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 13, 2012 -> 01:20 PM) Pete Thamel ‏@SIPeteThamel Al Golden, a favorite of Barry Alvarez, has emerged heavily at Wisconsin. Source says Golden mulling a decision today. On Sunday I told my cousins who went to Miami thanks for the coach. They thought I was crazy, but it makes perfect sense when you think about the Donna Shalala- Barry Alvarez love fest.

Its funny that Losing My Religion is more memorable than some of the biggest acts in history. And Chris Martin has actually been funny.

What counts more, regular season or post season? Im not sure what your angle is here. Are you related to Bielema or something?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 12, 2012 -> 07:37 PM) I do n't understand why wins would be a terrible way to look at it. When they picked the Big Ten coach of the year, you complained and mentioned wins. I did? Im not sure I commented on Big 10 Coach of the year. And wins arent a good reason because it doesnt take into account how many games you were supposed to win to start. If my team is favored by 20+ points in 90% of the games, an 80% success rate isnt good, right?

It was a humorous link, some people actually read message boards for fun.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 12, 2012 -> 05:47 PM) Sorry, this is more sour grapes .it wasn't about money, it was just coincidental they now get paid more. Everyone hates Biellema blah,blah, blah. Next time a coach leaves like Bielema did, go to one of thei message boards. You will hear the same thing. No it really isnt. If Bo Ryan was hired to be the next coach at UNC for more money, Id bet most Wisconsin fans would be congratulating Bo on all the hard work and effort he put into Wisconsin. You have not even watched Wisconsin play, yet you are acting like you know something about the football program. That is hubris.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Dec 12, 2012 -> 05:32 PM) Is that a fact you learned from someone with the team, or just more speculation? I really think the next coach that leaves a successful major college program for another and doesn't get slammed by his former team's fan base as being a bad coach, or an asshole or some guy who was about to get fired, will be the first. Coaches ultimately get judged by wins and losses. Bielema had a better win ing percentage than Alvarez and most likely will have a better one than his successor. Its mere speculation. After winning the Rose Bowl Bielema paraded around Wisconsin with the trophy and told the Seniors on Monday to ignore the rumors as he wasnt leaving. The next morning he left for Arkansas, but asked Wisconsin if he could still coach in the Rose Bowl. The problem with your argument is that you are acting like people loved Bielema prior to his leaving and then changed when he left. He was not well liked by Wisconsin fans from day 1, even though he was Barry's hand picked successor he was considered an extremely underwhelming choice. Even worse, Bielema (an Iowa player) was selected over home town boy Paul Chryst. Last year Paul Chryst left Wisconsin for Pittsburgh and most assistants went with him. It wasnt about money, it was about the fact that Bielama is extremely arrogant and hard to work with. And you keep harping on winning percentage, but there needs to be context. The next Wisconsin HC will likely have a lower winning percentage because Big10 will likely increase in-conference games and thus he will have 1 less automatic victory every year. Does it prove that Bielema is a good coach because he can beat Wisconsin State Tech every year? I assume since you did not answer that you havent watched Wisconsin play at all.

How many minutes of Wisconsin football have you watched under Bielema? Because the first words out of my mouth after the Big10 championship were: "What the hell just happened, why did Wisconsin all of a sudden completely change their philosophy." The answer it seems is that Bielema thought Wisconsin was going to lose to Nebraska, so he just let his coordinators do whatever they wanted.

The lady doth protest too much, methinks. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Creaning Nothing to see here folks!