iamshack

Hawk mentioned this group during the game today.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jul 14, 2013 -> 01:35 PM) So clearly, the answer is to prevent all crime Yes, that would be ideal. There certainly is nothing wrong with arming your children with a plan, as opposed to determining "this woud never happen to my child." I still cannot wrap my mind around the notion that Zimmerman's behavior is considered by many as non-threatening.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jul 14, 2013 -> 12:39 PM) What can you tell those parents? You don't have to tell them anything if it didn't happen in the first place.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jul 14, 2013 -> 12:18 PM) You tell your kid it's an abberation because that's what it is. Tell that to the parents of the dead kids.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jul 14, 2013 -> 10:23 AM) I assume you don't have kids based on this, but seriously...were you EVER a kid? Did you ever have any sort of, "what to do in an attempted kidnapping training", or "what to do when a stranger tries to give you candy" lessons? Or even, what to do if you're actively being stalked? Seriously. I figured this was something every parent put their kids through. You can't control being suspicious to someone, but you CAN attract attention if some creep ass is following you. You yell, you scream, you make noise...you attract attention, you bang on a neighbors door, a strangers door, whoever has lights on, or...if you're close enough to home, you go there. If you're caught by a person like this, yes, you defend yourself and yes, that CAN lead to death. In short, you do what you have to do to get away, or find help/attract help, or defend yourself when necessary. These are teenagers, not 7 year olds. If you're 17 and you're screaming, people think you're going to be the troublemaker, not the one in trouble. The only thing you can do if this is happening, is call the police and either try to get to a public place or try to get somewhere where the threatening person cannot attack you. And if you're a teenager, especially a minority teenager, that probably makes you look even more suspicious. Bottom line is, there is no way "neighborhood watch" people should be engaging people, especially with guns, because they simply do not have the appropriate training to do so. That is how this is best avoided.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jul 14, 2013 -> 05:39 AM) I know tensions are running high and everyone thinks they "know" he's guilty (or innocent), but the facts simply couldn't prove his guilt. That's how the system works, no matter what every commenter "knows" in their infinite wisdom. It's just wrong, that's all. Now I'm going to go rob someone, but if by some chance my victim kicks my ass, I'll shoot him and claim self-defense.

QUOTE (oldsox @ Jul 13, 2013 -> 04:30 PM) Hawk interviewed Hayed early in the Phils game, and I wasn't able to hear it. Was anything said of value? No. Just some talk about some of the guys rumored to be potentially traded getting a bit of a reality dose with Thornton actually getting moved.

I think it is sanctions, not criminal charges

I thought we wanted a few high-ceiling guys in these trades? Well guys, these are the high-ceiling players you get for a reliever like Thornton....ones that have plenty of flaws currently...

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 07:57 PM) This means Dayan or De Aza better start packing their bags. I sure hope its not Ale...I like him a lot more than Dayan

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 07:10 PM) I don't think that's a fair reading of the law, or at least of the intent of the law. That is a quote from the actual language of the statute. Again, I tend to agree it probably is not enough of a pattern of events to be stalking, but I think you can certainly make an argument. If I send a few threatening messages on Facebook, that could be stalking,, but following a guy around in person for 20 minutes is not? Read the statute, the same elements are present.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 06:39 PM) It says repeatedly follow. That whole situation would be looked at as one individual incident of following. It also says "a series of acts over a period of time, however short, which evidences a continuity of purpose." I think this could qualify as such. I tend to agree with you, but I think it's close...which, to me, shows that his behavior did rise darn close to a level of unlawfulness.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 05:18 PM) Sale is 24 though. I don't see the rebuilding taking 5 years unless Santiago and Quintana aren't the SP's they have shown they are/can be. In other words, the heaviest of lifting in this rebuild might already be done with that rotation top 3. I'm not seeing the consistency out of Santiago that I would like to, but I haven't been watching closely either. Has he improved?

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 05:07 PM) That would be one incident though. I didn't get the impression that it had to consist of more than one incident.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 04:34 PM) This is a good point - worth pointing out that Chris had a 4.8 WAR last season. He is on track for a bit higher than that this year. How much more do these players need to produce to make us feel better about position scarcity? In a situation when there is (presently) a scarcity of WAR, do we care so much about position scarcity or is that too short-sighted? Obviously it depends on your starting point. Right now, we've got so many holes, the odds are we're not going to be acquiring or developing a team full of 5-war players simultaneously. If we were looking for something to get us over the top, then yes, trading Sale for several lesser parts makes no sense. But when you need sooo many pieces, you've got to spend the resources you have to improve, or else you're looking at competing in a window where having Sale around still is unlikely. Obviously the key is potential. You need a package where at least one or two of the prospects is as high as Sale himself.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 04:39 PM) "Repeatedly", so it's not stalking there either. Probably not, but didn't he follow him first in his vehicle and then on foot?

QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 02:57 PM) Does one of you have a definition other than "makes the All-Star team at some point?" I'm thinking its very possible there could be 3 all-stars in the farm systems of Arizona, St Louis, Texas, Pittsburgh, etc. Not saying that kind of deal is commonplace, but neither is trading someone like Sale.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 03:05 PM) I am saying Martin could have gone home and nothing happens. But he chose to hide and the rest is history. You guys are saying he is a big man and a puss but yet fast enough to "chase" Martin and catch him. No way. I call bulls***. Absolutely. The thing that distinguishes Martin's behavior from Zimmerman's is that it was far less threatening.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 02:58 PM) And he caught him? in a chase? you guys are really soft in here if you believe this tub of goo caught a 17 yr kid. Please someone answer WHy didn't Martin just go home? So are you making the argument that although neither was doing anything unlawful, they were still both equally at fault?

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 02:55 PM) Most laws are very similar, no idea how theirs reads. Just putting it out there. http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index....s/0784.048.html

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 02:34 PM) Fair enough, I think we're generally in agreement. That does not fit the ILCS definition of stalking either, though. Well, this did not occur in Illinois. You could certainly argue it under the Florida statute.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 01:54 PM) Disobeying a police officer. Yes, and so is littering and loitering. When you have charges of this magnitude, it doesn't really matter for the point that is being made...and I am not sure you are really arguing that it does, just pointing out that Zimmerman ignoring the advice of the 911 operator means nothing as far as being in violation of any laws. I guess what I (and some others) was trying to point out is that it does show that a trained professional, whose duties include advising civilians how to behave in the face of an extreme situation, advised Zimmerman not to continue following Martin. Yes, Zimmerman is under no legal obligation to obey the 911 operator (for liability reasons which the police generally have received special treatment for), however it does establish that Zimmerman's course of conduct may have been ill-thought out, unreasonable, and/or even reckless. While they apparently did not rise to the level of being unlawful (I suspect one could make a case for "stalking"), they certainly contributed to the fact that one person is now dead and Zimmerman himself is on trial.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 01:25 PM) iamshack, there are municipal ordinances in the city for such things. I imagine Florida, or the city or county, have something similar. Municipal ordinances for what?

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 01:29 PM) What are the chances that one organization has three all-stars in their farm system? That's why you stick with Sale for the foreseeable future. Umm...there are plenty...

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Jul 12, 2013 -> 01:06 PM) Can't deal Sale because the overwhelming chances that he'll still be the best player in any trade 5 years from now. That isn't any of our concern at this stage of the game. If we get 3 guys that become all-stars, does it really matter if Chris still ends up being the best player?