Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 03:49 PM) And you're surprised that PETA got in on the act because? I expected all of my liberal friends to be up in arms about a group calling for another human's death by hanging.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 03:45 PM) No one here thought it was a big enough deal to bring up until the "OMG PETA said something out-rageous!!!" post. I had debated bringing it up earlier because the outrage has been kind of extreme and borderline ridiculous.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 03:22 PM) Or two licensed guides trying to do a little something on the side to pocket more cash for themselves... Sounds likely here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 03:11 PM) Well yeah, but in those cases you also have licensing deals and other similar arrangements that you can use to indicate that the person is actually doing their job. If you buy a car from a guy off the street and you pay cash, and the car turns out to be stolen, you're the one possessing stolen property. Something tells me there aren't exactly licensing agencies in Africa that make sure people file appropriate big game hunting paperwork. Please tell me if I'm wrong and there's a strong labor union protecting their rights. Actually there a lot of innocent owner/innocent bona fide purchaser exceptions in the law. If you bought a used car and were provided authentic looking title docs, you'd have a pretty solid defense to being charged with possessing stolen property. also, for what it's worth, the washington post claims: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning...ss-of-big-game/ So yeah, it's possible he just got s***ty, unlicensed guides. He could have also gotten two legal guides that were also morons and didn't know the lion/area they were in. This, from the national geographic, seems to indicate they were legit guides who did something illegal: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/07...vation-animals/

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 03:10 PM) All good reasons to stop this disgusting fantasy fulfillment for rich assholes. Even if it means we keep losing animals to extinction? Not a very logical position.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 03:06 PM) Seems like you could game plausible deniability pretty easily that way. I guess, but what knowledge does a Minnesota dentist have about lions and property lines in Africa? If it turns out they told the guy what they were doing and he shot anyway, i'm in agreement with you. If he thought, innocently, that he bought and paid for the kill and it was all legal and proper, I don't see how he's at fault.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 03:02 PM) They could donate the money without needing to "hunt" an animal someone else tracked and drove them to. They COULD, but they won't. If there's a market for it, and at the end of the day it aids a conservation goal, why not do it?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 03:02 PM) The desire to kill a lion as a trophy is still pretty pathetic. And he's still at least partially responsible. Why? If you hire an expert in any other field (doctor, lawyer, whatever) and you rely on their expertise, its generally not your fault if some third party gets hurt through their screw up.

There's a decent argument, I think made through a 60 minutes special, that these big game hunters are actually a net positive to the animal populations/reserves, because they pay so much. They fund a lot of these places which allow animals to thrive. Not sure if that is the case here with a lion.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 02:57 PM) Personally, I think what the dentist did was sick and I am not anti-hunting by nature, but luring a protected animal out of its protected space and paying a fine just to stick it up as a trophy sickens me. It's my understanding that he is basically a dude that wanted to kill a lion, so he hired a bunch of guides who told him they got the proper permits and it was all cool. The blame seems to be on the guides moreso than the guy.

Ok, I get that killing the lion wasn't very popular. But really? http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/ceci...?source=gravity PETA and their ilk are every bit as crazy as the religious right.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 02:42 PM) Only thing is, if their is any truth to him potentially getting 1 game, and the evidence mounted so far against him, why would he be stupid enough not to accept the 1 game. I suppose he might just have an ego that he just presumed he could strong arm them to victory? I think the official rumor is that the NFL offered 2 games for his "confession." But yeah, I'd imagine it's about ego now. And tainted legacy. Now his history will mention this stuff, but there's no confession, there's no direct proof. The conspiracy angle can still be there.

There really should be a legal presumption that if you're flying over private property without permission, you're unreasonably interfering with the use of the property, or perhaps creating a nuisance. Or even invading someone's privacy, although those civil laws are pretty meaningless and would have to be changed.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 02:18 PM) That said drones are raising more and more issues. They recently screwed up a California firefighting mission http://www.npr.org/2015/07/23/425654435/ca...ne-interference The guys that strapped the gun on the drone was kind of eye opening for me. I dunno why, but I thought at worse we'd get a lot privacy, peeping tom issues with drones. But man, if someone gets killed by a drone gun attack, how on earth are you going to solve that? At some point (if not now) you could control a drone from states or countries away via the internet.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 02:13 PM) If the bullet were to hit someone on the way back down, would he face extra charges for that? Sure, that's the risk you take. It was a shotgun too. Much less dangerous than a more powerful weapon that's going to send a bullet a mile or whatever into the air. edit: I mean I'm fine giving the guy a fine for some ordinance violation. I would be less agreeable to jail time for it.

I'm fine with him shooting it. How else are you going to stop that? Call the cops? The drone will be gone by then and there's no way for the pervs to get caught. You should have a right to privacy on your property, including the air above your property. Good for this guy for fighting it.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 12:33 PM) Wasn't the "arbitrator" Goddell himself? Yeah, but i'm guessing that per the CBA, both parties (the NFL and NFLPA) agreed to that set up.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 12:15 PM) This general case has seemed persuasive to me throughout, well summarized. I will be intrigued to see if they're able to present anything else solid in response when this case goes before an actual judge. It won't though, that's the thing. A judge is not going to retry the case on the merits. An arbitrator ruled, unless they skipped protocol or did something totally unjust, the judge won't change the decision.

Has everyone read the finding? I mean, it's very thorough and well written. The most damning things to me: Brady was asked to produce the phone and text/email records beginning in Feb (and multiple times thereafter). His interview with Wells was March 6th. He destroyed the phone March 6th. He DID provide a cell phone used a year prior, and he offered to provide his new phone (starting on March 6) but the NFL said it wasn't necessary. He instead refused to give the phone during the most damning time period - from the AFC championship game to March 6, his interview with Wells. Clearly his concerns for his private records is a bulls*** argument when he had handed over or offered to hand over 2 other phones for inspection. More importantly though, the NFL agreed to let Brady's attorney pick out the responsive communications and to keep the private ones private. Brady still refused to do that. The whole thing is silly and dumb, but I really can't say I have any qualms with what the Commish did. 4 games seems like a lot for such a minor offense, but he reasoned that it's akin to a first violation for steroids. Both involve an attempt to gain a competitive advantage by skirting the rules (and it doesn't require you to prove a competitive advantage was obtained), and both come with a 4 game penalty. Add in that Brady basically destroyed evidence and refused to fully cooperate, and I think what probably should have been a 1-2 game suspension goes to 4. Still dumb in the grand scheme, but I can see the logic behind it.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 11:26 AM) Right. There's a punishment spelled out in the rules/CBA for tampering with the balls, and it's a fine. The suspension on top of that is pretty ridiculous but it's along the same lines as the rest of Goddell's arbitrary decisions. The suspension is Brady's response to the rules violation though, not the violation itself. When you give a commissioner carte blanche authority to hand out penalties for undefined "good of the game" type infractions, you get inconsistent rulings.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jul 29, 2015 -> 11:16 AM) In cases where their is hard evidence against players, suspensions get reduced (e.g., police records, etc). In this case, well at this point, I think the whole thing is insane. League vs. power owner, star player, etc. Just makes no sense and Kraft has put them on blast and it seems like the NFL is spinning everything they can at this point to be anti-brady (but I don't understand any motive they'd have to do so). That said, in this case, it is all circumstantial. They say the phone was destroyed...Brady refers to it as broke (big difference). Also, apparently, Brady asked Wells if they were going to need anything (this is from Brady's side so who knows if it was true) and they said no. This isn't like he destroyed it before the investigation, I believe it was destroyed before the appeals process (but again, I might be wrong, have heard way too many different stories over the radio). Sounded to me like Brady admitted he destroyed the phone, as it was his common practice to do so when he gets a new phone, and that he ordered that his assistant destroy the phone the day or day before he was meeting with Wells. I mean this is like in any criminal case: you can choose to believe it's all 100% coincidental, or, given that common sense dictates that Wells would be interested in looking at his phone, and Brady knew that, Brady purposefully destroyed the phone to hide incriminating evidence. I think that is plenty of evidence in a "more probably true than not" situation for the NFL to suspend him. edit: yeah i mean it says it right in the findings: on the day he was going to be interviewed by Wells, and knowing the Wells wanted to see the phone and its contents (for months prior), he ordered the phone to be destroyed. How is there any innocent way to read that? He clearly wanted to destroy that phone and its contents. There's plenty of smoke here. Hell, there's direct evidence in the text messages between the ball boys. The fact that Kraft originally didn't fight it is also telling. Now of course Kraft is trying to protect his player, but he probably didn't think it would ever get this far.

I sometimes put my right index finger down the grip of my putter (aiming towards the ground). I feel like that gives me more control over the putter face being too open or closed.

I'm both simultaneously shocked that Brady is getting hit with 4 games for a pretty minor offense, and at the same time shocked that people don't seem to think there is enough evidence to suspend him for it.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Jul 28, 2015 -> 05:33 PM) I am finally hitting the ball pretty well across the board except putting. I've learned how to play my slight (depending on wind) slice on my drive. I am only worried because I line up with the ball in front of my front foot. So my two questions are 1.) cheap tip for reducing slice? and 2.) what's the putting bible everyone swears by? 1) When my natural slice comes back, I try to really over emphasize the extension of my arms through the swing. A lot of amateurs who slice cut their swing short and bring their arms back towards their body way too quickly. To get an idea of what i'm talking about, for what you should try to do, check out the swings of Nicklaus and Colin Montgomery. They have a sort of scoop follow through. That sort of motion will force you to hit through the ball, not across the ball, which causes the slice. 2) Is your issue aim or pace? Pace just comes down to practice. Aim is usually a set up issue. Make you're you're creating a good triangle with your hands, arms and shoulders. Make sure you're only rotating with your shoulders, not your wrists. For aiming I've done the opposite-Jordan Speith move: for a 5-7 foot putt he normally just looks at the hole the entire time. I do the complete opposite if my aim/set up is wrong. I never move my eyes from the ball area. I take my putt and try to visualize that straight line through the ball. I'm not concerned with where the ball ends up, just how my back swing and follow through look. Grab another club, place the shaft parallel to the putting line, and do that routine for a while. You'll know if you're going straight back and following through the ball as you should be.

Holy crap this list of terrible Adam Sandler movies just keeps going: http://io9.com/adam-sandler-has-a-hell-of-...-for-1720665896 Sad because I grew up on and loved Billy Madison, Happy Gilmore, Water Boy, etc. I bet those movie are damn near unwatchable now, much like anything Jim Carrey.