Jake

FWIW, PFF had Urlacher as among the worst defensive players in the NFL last year, especially at his position. That said, he was near the top the year before. It isn't unreasonable to think that he could get healthy and be great again, though I'm not sure how much money I'd spend on that bet.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 5, 2013 -> 06:49 PM) Jeff Fletcher ‏@JeffFletcherOCR #Angels finalize Callaspo's 2-yr $8.975M deal. He'll get $4.1M in '13, $4.875M in '14, plus award bonuses. I had been hoping trader Rick could get Alberto to the South Side. Oh well.

I don't watch as much Indiana as their fans do, but they shot over 50%. Can't be their worst game because they were either lucky or good enough to have made a good enough portion of their shots to not have all those turnovers hurt them. Likewise, UI only shot 43% with a bad 3PT% -- not an other worldly game from them. I recall watching IU earlier this season and being certain that Illinois could beat them. I thought that the Illini team that wins big games was gone, though. Maybe we can turn things around? I like winning with seniors.

Well that was pretty f***ing cool.

QUOTE (God Loves The Infantry @ Feb 7, 2013 -> 01:25 AM) I don't believe God made anyone gay. Feel free to point to any study showing otherwise. I think it goes back to the old nature vs. nurture argument. And with the exception of what you physically look like, I think "nurture" determines everything. Was I predisposed to like women? I don't think so. I think my upbringing made me that way. Was I predisposed to conservatism and religion? Nope. My experiences in life made me think this way. So this will probably be a controversial statement, but it is what it is. And why should I not be allowed to think it? I'm not legislating this on anyone. These are my personal thoughts. And that's really why I don't want to legislate my religion on people. I already told you that God gave us free will. If He did that, who am I to take that away from people? God gave you the power to be gay, or to be promiscuous, or to be blasphemous. He also gave you the right to be greedy and hoard your money, even though His Son tells the rich man to give up his possessions and follow Him. Christ didn't make the rich man do that, because in Christianity, you have free will. On the note of homosexuality as a natural phenomenon, more or less all animal species engage in some degree of same-sex sexual behavior. There is little that is universally agreed on in the field at the moment, due to the fact that there are multiple factors. The first thing to understand is there is more than just being "straight" or "gay." Not only is sexual orientation spectral, it is fluid. Women exhibit fluidity more than men, but nonetheless human sexuality can change across a lifetime from a variety of factors. Beyond that, there are several key determining factors. First of all, there is more and more research showing genetic predisposition. Research into the "gay gene" and other related genetic factors seems to explain as much as half the cause for a person being gay. Other factors including the gestation and birth process can have a profound effect as well as life events. Trauma, birth order, natural personality variation can all lead to higher or lower likelihood of sexuality. You can read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation An interesting trend noted in a study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10410197 This was a huge revelation in Christian and political philosophy. If you don't have choices, then you've made no choices. You have to have agency in the selection of your beliefs or else they can hardly be sincere. This is why the USA is the most religious country in the Western world (hard to measure in the Middle East). People came here and were free to choose any of several thriving denominations or even nothing at all. A long tradition of relative religious freedom has resulted in a multi-denominational, very religious society. There are certainly fewer believers than in a state instituted religious society or one that has too recently allowed religious freedom (look at Spain, where the counterreaction to the end of their Catholic dictatorship has resulted in a huge loss of religious persons), but those that believe in the USA are far more sincere about it. They don't just go to church, but they often actually put effort and lifestyle changes forth to live their religion correctly.

Really hope you win!

So...what is the optimum time to switch phones? ATM, I'm on an iPhone 4 and I'm planning to go Android unless Apple blows my mind. Of the phone makers, I probably trust Samsung the most but I'm willing to play the field.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Feb 6, 2013 -> 12:17 PM) Paul Konerko would too and it would end up costing the team, so there. Haha yeah, I pulled a Konerko and played too long as it is. I was out there with no velocity and too much pain to actually think clearly about what I was doing. Luckily I was a sinkerballer so I got away with things a little bit more than a different type of pitcher. Thanks for the kind words everybody. Unluckily for you guys, this only leaves more time for me to be posting on here...at least until I get a part time job.

It does not take some crazy amount of change to have a society that both rewards smart investors and savers AND protects those with only adequate competency or those that lack the means.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 6, 2013 -> 10:53 AM) Whoa. Why are you so incredibly defensive? It's almost as though you tee-up these debates and then the moment someone chimes in, you come in, guns-blazing, looking for a repository for your anger or something. I wasn't speaking personally. I was speaking, in general. You made several assertions in your post as though they were factual, when they clearly are not. You also mentioned how you don't understand how others within your belief system could think certain things. I was merely pointing out that when you're discussing a belief system in which so much is based on faith, you're going to have many different interpretations and nuances of those beliefs, because there really are no clear-cut answers one can point to. These are the hard-line rules I mentioned...you know none of these things to be true. These are merely your beliefs. I haven't read everything here, but that choice of words made me laugh out loud.

QUOTE (maggsmaggs @ Feb 5, 2013 -> 11:15 AM) How on Earth was Chris Spencer making over $4 million? That's hideous. $4 million combined on worthless TEs and $7 million on a returner who could barely do that this year. That's a hilarious waste of $15 million. On one hand, that's terrible. On the other, that means we have more room to bring good players in without sending good players out -- you can cut $15M in dead weight, essentially.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 6, 2013 -> 09:45 AM) Why would you need more than 1200+ a month, plus whatever you have saved for retirement? By 65 you shouldn't have any debt. House, loans, cars, etc should all be paid off. You don't have to worry about healthcare costs or prescription drug costs. What else is there? My grandmother has nothing. Her public housing takes almost her entire SS check. My parents have to buy her supplement insurance for the things Medicare doesn't cover fully. I hope I can avoid that kind of life and if not, that my children are as supportive as hers.

QUOTE (God Loves The Infantry @ Feb 6, 2013 -> 08:08 AM) I suspect I'll be mocked here for expressing my views about sin and abortion. That doesn't really bother me, but I'd like to make something clear about sin. And who knows, maybe if people can think reasonably about it, interesting discussion will ensue. I'm reminded of a discussion I had a long time ago with StrangeSox, where I mentioned that I would not want a gay son. Would I love him any less? Of course not. But I don't think it's an unreasonable thing to not want a son to face any additional challenges. As far as I'm concerned, only a serious activist would want that, and likely at the expense of his own child. I think it's worth noting that want and accept are two very different things. The reaction, not surprisingly, was that I was a bigot. It's a delicate question. I have no problem with someone being gay. I'm not religious, so I don't find it to be on any different ground morally than other sexual behavior. If my son was gay, I'd love him. That said, if he was, he'd be born into the world with a big set of challenges ahead of him that others like myself did not have to deal with. In that sense, I might say I don't want my son to be gay. Not because I don't want my son to date men, but because I don't want people to hate him, hurt him, or have his experience as a free person be less free than mine. Same with daughter, of course, just using the same gender to be consistent. I hope he'd play baseball, though!

The question is how much lethal power should any single person have? On one hand, I've actually thought about doing it a bit similar to Switzerland where soldiers and former soldiers are given much more leeway to own firearms. An important consideration in the USA, though, is that our soldiers actually fight and some of them may need some medical/psychological help upon return before getting special privileges with guns. I'm happy to pay for this with my tax dollar, we can easily redirect that from some of the defense budget bloat. I had often thought, what if we demand much more training? That should help. Well...we like to think our soldiers are the best trained men in the world when it comes to lethal weapons. Maybe it could encourage recruitment, even. Our main problem is there are just way too many guns. Magazine limits and AR bans will to some extent at some point help with mass shootings, but the problem "on the streets" is that there are so many guns, getting one is easy. It will be difficult to erase the problems of a trade that has been too unregulated. We should still try to do things as simple as require enough bookkeeping to see which stores have guns stolen from them, etc. Gun buybacks are great but unless they get a bigger well to pay from, it will be like takings drops out of a bucket. A unique issue to the gun problem is that guns have a much longer shelf life than other things that we try to control. Weed gets old fast and gets consumed faster. For guns, on the other hand, there are guns in my dad's gun cabinet that are much older than me and they are no antiques. Just as lethal and useful as ever.

Thanks pt, I really like that site. SS, you're the second person to point me towards him. Must be legit!

So I officially am in wait to get surgery done on my shoulder. I will not be able to lift weights with my upper body again until at least December. Some of this is due to the fact I'm putting off surgery until after the school year, but you get the point. Someone in my office mentioned a St. Jude Marathon happening here in December. I realized that instead of half-assing my way around the weight room and aimlessly conditioning, I can start to prepare for that marathon. Granted, there will be a significant "blip" of sorts in May when I get operated on, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't start prepping now. I can do 5 and 10k's before then and I'll be in a far better starting position then than I am now if I start hitting it hard. With that said, anyone have any suggestions on how to get started on this quest? I don't want to plunge in too quickly and get hurt. I used to train with the Dr. Daniels Running Bible in high school, should I pick that up?

As of today, I'm no longer a college baseball player. Got taken down by a kind of weird shoulder injury -- our training staff really doesn't know why I have it beyond "throwing is bad for you" and "you must have gotten it a long time ago." I was lucky enough to get an excuse to stick around the team...I now will start doing play by play for our video streaming service for home games. I get a little money, a drastic reduction in time commitment, and I don't abandon a program that was good to me. Win win.

QUOTE (Tex @ Feb 5, 2013 -> 05:31 PM) Nice analysis. Now we would have to look at what the punishment is. Is the punishment not being allowed to mount an M-16 in the bed of your pickup truck? Or is the punishment not being allowed to own more than 10,000 rounds at one time? Or is it not being allowed to buy a gun without a more detailed background search? I hope we all would agree that there are reasonable "punishments" or restrictions that a well regulated militia will follow. Hell, you have restrictions at your work on weapons you can possess. This is part of the argument I don't like, like you said. Some proposed restrictions (particularly those that are destined to fail) might affect your gun ownership. You wouldn't be able to buy something classified as an AR -- so if you ever wanted to do that, and a few people do, you won't be allowed to. Likewise, the few people that want larger magazines won't be able to get them. The rest though, does not affect your enjoyment of guns. You're not being punished, you're spending 15 more minutes of paperwork to help weed out the assholes that make you look bad.

My assessment from some of the earlier parts of this thread is: When in need of protection, I'd like as large a magazine as I choose. also, When we have magazine limits, that will make no difference because anyone who knows a gun from their asshole won't be any less effective from having to do a .5 second reload.

QUOTE (God Loves The Infantry @ Feb 4, 2013 -> 11:08 AM) I don't think we agree on what straw purchasing is. To me, a straw purchase is when I, as a decent citizen with no criminal history, buys several firearms in a short period of time and turn around and give them to drug cartels. Or gang bangers. Or some creepy high school kid. Using my clean past to deliberately supply criminals or other sorts who couldn't otherwise obtain them. What you're talking about is private sales. Perhaps there is a way to set up a system so that citizens can call in easily and scan other private citizens. But its hard to force people to do that. I guess you could ban private sales but I don't see how that'd reduce the actual dangerous private sales. So that's a tricky one. Also, I agree with you that gun confiscation will go poorly and probably not happen. That doesn't mean I'm prepared to cede to what is the first step on that road. I am somewhat intentionally conflating the terms. I like what you said -- it doesn't make much sense to ban you from selling or transferring things you own to other people, but I'd like that to become part of our background checking process. We can all become an accidental straw seller because many of us sell things to people we don't know. Obviously you aren't arrested in this case, but instead of having people accidentally helping gangs or whomever else...we can require checks.

QUOTE (God Loves The Infantry @ Feb 4, 2013 -> 09:20 AM) I'm against an assault weapons ban. Wholly. First, none of the things offered by the 1994 ban or the new version affected the functionality of the weapon. Second, it is a very limited amount of crimes that are committed with those rifles (1994 AWB had no noticeable affect on crime). Frankly, the AWB just comes off as a sort of lame idea to get rid of scary looking weapons. Magazine restrictions, nope. Most killings are not spree killings. Killers don't need massive amounts of bullets to do what they want to do, normally. I'd be OK with honing the background check system. What I'd be against is deliberately using it to look for reasons to prevent people from having guns. I had depression a few years ago. But I came back and proved myself capable of deploying. Should I be deprived of buying new guns? You might think this is paranoid, but I absolutely believe that registration is step one for confiscation. The government doesn't need to know who has guns and who doesn't. Besides, look at that paper in New York publicizing who had permits in a given area. If there is a right to privacy to cover abortion, I absolutely believe in a right to privacy on gun ownership. I'm against straw purchasing. I'd honestly be shocked if someone in my camp favored straw purchasing. It's already illegal anyway, if I'm not mistaken (I've never thought about it because I'm not a straw purchaser). Also, to understand my viewpoints on this, I think it's only logical that criminals will not follow these laws. They'll obtain "assault weapons". They'll obtain high capacity mags. They won't register their weapons. And they'll continue to straw purchase and evade background checks. So it won't affect them, but it will punish me and my friends. And I don't see much point in that. Well I suppose there are two things to consider here. I agree that an assault weapons ban would probably have little demonstrable effect on overall crime rates, even if it is better implemented. As you said, I have a feeling very few of the Chicago murders were committed with that sort of weapon. With that said, we are also concerned with how many people a single deranged individual can kill at once. This is where magazine restriction and "assault weapons" come in. In these mass killings it'd be great if we made these people demonstrate their wares well enough to reload, aim a short-barreled weapon, etc. You may recall that the Arizona shooter was disarmed while in the process of reloading and had his been magazine been restricted to 10 (IIRC) shots, two lives would have been saved. So there are two issues being addressed. Killings and mass killings. These have different causes. As far as background checks go, you're right to see that it must be delicate. Lots of people go through things in their lives, and we should not de-incentivize seeking professional help for fear that you'll lose your rights. The process will have to include perhaps second opinions and very formal questioning on the part of the doctor -- would you allow this individual to wield a firearm? If not, why? If so, when? Would Doctor X agree? Because we'll ask him too. The registration of guns would make it easier to confiscate them...but I really don't ever see a gun confiscation happening. We would literally lose a lot of lives in that process. There are a ton of people that would fight to the death if the government confiscated all guns. This is not to mention that you'd still have to check every household if there was a confiscation because in a country like this, people will have guns from a time before registration and/or just won't have followed the law in transferring or purchasing. Straw purchasing is legal in most places as I understand it. For the most part, sales between individuals requires no paperwork or anything like that. My brother traded a stereo speaker for a Glock on Craigslist...called the Sheriff to see if he needed to do anything, and they told him not to worry about it. The background check system is seriously undermined if these individual to individual sales are not monitored. This is why a huge portion of gun sales occur at gun shows and why those guns are disproportionately more likely to be involved in crimes. I live in Memphis -- I wonder why a city with a USA high murder rate has gun show billboards in its worst neighborhoods?

So all the yelling and stuff is great, but I'd like to ask GLI real questions about the present debate. Are you wholly against an "assault weapons" ban? Thoughts on magazine restrictions? Would you submit to a more well-rounded background check system, possibly with a more rigorous mental health screening process? This could affect you and your colleagues in the military a fair amount given the increasing prevalence and awareness of PTSD. Thoughts on a comprehensive gun registration program, where a legal gun owner's guns would be tracked from factory to retailer to residence? Straw purchases? I hope this can be more constructive for us instead of an argument about guns and phalluses.

I can't wait to see Kaepernick grow. The group of young QBs in the NFL right is astonishingly good. Might be good enough to save them from the impending backlash over concussions in the next 10 years.

I understand that some industry powers are not eager to allow research to happen -- that's not good. Our legislation should instead be for funding/making legal research on the topic.