Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 02:45 PM) The idea that 30,000+ people die in the U.S. every year from guns and this is ok and we should do nothing about it seems unbelievably perverse to me. Over the past 30 years, we've made cars safer and cut the casualty rate per year in auto deaths by 1/2, while the gun death rate has stayed basically constant. In 2015, it's likely that more Americans will die from guns than from auto accidents. Doing nothing about this problem seems like an incredibly perverse perspective. "Do nothing about it" to "ban guns" is a pretty big leap. edit: also:

QUOTE (Middle Buffalo @ Jul 21, 2015 -> 11:56 PM) Especially because he (and many others) quit on the Cubs for several seasons. Didn't watch. Didn't go to games, etc. Yet, Sox attendance and lack of fan base loyalty is good for 3-5 shows every year on the radio shows. I especially despise guys like Hanley who are now lecturing Sox fans/executives about "how to do things the right way" now that the Cubs are doing well. Jesus did that switch get flipped quickly. If/when the Cubs win the Series, this town will be insufferable for a few weeks. I might plan a vacation to avoid it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 01:40 PM) One of those things that kills a lot of people is legal. One of them is not. Both are incredibly irresponsible and lead to huge numbers of dead people. "If we ban drunk driving, only the criminals will drive drunk!". You have such a perverse perspective on guns. Did someone in your family get killed in a tragic accident or something? Is there some personal issue there?

QUOTE (illinilaw08 @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 11:59 AM) Tex, here's my problem with that argument. It assumes that the world is broken down into criminals and good guys. Good guys need guns to protect from criminals. It also assumes that every good guy who has a gun is trained to accurately and safely respond to an emergency. But that's not reality. Everyone is a good guy until they commit a crime. Not everyone who owns a gun is even close to appropriately trained with said gun (unlike the police). In my opinion/experience, guns have a potential to embolden citizens and cause them to do stupid things. Does Zimmerman approach Martin if he's not armed? Does this shoving match at Little Caesar's lead to a death if one of the guys isn't armed? http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/...service/1266589 I'm fine with gun ownership. I see the utility in a lot of respects. I may not buy the home defense argument, but I understand the home defense argument. I don't carry a firearm. I don't know enough about them, don't have enough experience with them, to safely operate one (and I don't have the desire to learn). As a result, the more people who are armed in movie theaters, on the streets, in campsites, and heaven forbid, at bars, the greater the risk (though admittedly that risk remains low) that I become an unintended victim when people get stupid. Like this guy: http://kdvr.com/2015/07/05/man-shot-and-ki...-rainbow-falls/ I acknowledge that the above examples are all anecdotal, but it's a huge stretch to argue (1) that people will conceal and carry responsibly; and (2) that people who conceal and carry are naturally appropriately trained to take out an active shooter without causing collateral damage. I think this is all 100% reasonable, but people have been able to conceal and carry in most states (now all states) legally for quite awhile now. So while we're hearing more and more about random incidents, you can't really say that people carrying and feeling emboldened to act are causing more incidents.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 11:48 AM) The most likely violent use of firearms is in suicide. The only way to prevent that is to get rid of them completely. Thanks for your support. well that's just false

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 24, 2015 -> 08:19 AM) I dunno if anger is the right word. Saddened, sure. Doesn't make me want myself or a bunch of other people to start carrying guns, though. This seems like an especially terrible reason to carry a gun. That's largely due to our own myth-making about stranger-danger, and I'm not sure how carrying a gun helps that anyway. And when parents do send their kids to play at the local playground by themselves, they get DCFS called. I don't think vigilantism is the answer. Same could be said about the need to enact a ton of gun laws on the myth that you'll be a victim of a mass shooting (or just a shooting).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 02:02 PM) So the common sense response is something that won't do anything either. I'm guessing she wouldn't have been arrested. Maybe, maybe not. But if she just fought the cigarette thing but then got out of the car and kept calm and quiet, he may have calmed down. Instead she continued to piss him off and agitate him.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 01:15 PM) With how menial the provocation was in this case (put that cigarette out immediately flashes into get out of the car/taze threat/arrest), there's no way that you could actually educate human beings to be that passive. Having to deal with police in an adversarial way is going to annoy some people, maybe even catch them on a bad day. There's just no way you could ever, ever get humans to always be this passive. You don't have to be 100% passive, but you can always bite your tongue to prevent the situation from boiling over. In this case there's no excuse for the cop, but she resisted and then just kept talking and complaining and fighting his instructions. She's never winning that argument, so voice your displeasure and then stop. Continuing to annoy him does nothing but make the situation worse. I mean we've all been there. A cop pulls you over for some BS thing and starts berating you. You could tell him what's what and get that ticket, or you can just take the verbal abuse and get a warning. What's "right" is telling the cop off. The common sense response is to just deal with it and call the department chief to complain later.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 12:57 PM) "she was resisting arrest" "I felt threatened" "she assaulted me" Lawsuits also cost time and money and may never lead anywhere. kerr's a law professor writing on a law blog, so I think his point is to question the law and court rulings behind some of this. I mean yeah that's the risk, but again, you resisting and escalating the situation to the point that you get arrested only hurts the cause. It doesn't help it. And you're never going to logically talk a cop out of arresting you.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 12:46 PM) Well that's exactly Orin's point, that we shouldn't be forced to comply with anything a cop says or otherwise face fear of physical assault and imprisonment. There's also the times where the person obeys the cop's request and still gets shot. But what we should/shouldn't have to do and what is reality are two different things. That's my point. It's just common sense to deal with asshole cops, keep your mouth shut, have a s***ty 5-10 minute experience and then move on with your life. You arguing about it and fighting back never, ever works. Ever. It's not worth the effort. Fight back after the fact with a lawsuit and/or complaints to the department. Edit: again, i'm not saying we shouldn't be doing more to stop this from the cop's side. But what's the point of these articles other than to say we should all resist even MORE because our rights are being violated? To me that just escalates these situations.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 12:30 PM) Sandra Bland and the “lawful order” problem So again, why not just comply with any command of a cop? Until your life is at risk for doing something a cop asks you to do, just do it. If it ends up being a rights violation, sue them in court. Why take the chance on getting arrested or worse, getting beat up and/or killed? I'm not at all absolving asshole cops out there. There's clearly a problem going on in this country with cops being overzealous and physical. It should be 100 times easier to fire asshole cops out there and we should be able to sue cops individually for going above and beyond anything they're supposed to do. That'd solve a lot of the problems. [edit: like the asshole in this case. Not putting out a cigarette, a request, is not a failing to abide by a lawful order and he had no right to force her out of the car.] But to be fair to cops, people DO resist and need to be physically handled to effectuate an arrest or even a search. I'm sure part of the problem here is that 90% of people respond kindly to officers and follow their requests/orders, and 10% don't. And of the 10% that don't, 90% of those are going to be full on resist-mode people. So a cop, over time, is just going to assume that anyone not following an order is resisting and are going to try and flee or whatever.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jul 22, 2015 -> 04:51 PM) f*** Emerald Ash borer. I had a party last week at my house and one of the attendees was a certified arborist. Apparently I have an amazing, mature Ash tree in my backyard. I knew it was an awesome tree (huge, full, provides great shade) but I had no idea it was an Ash. He was convinced that I had the tree treated because he had never seen one in such good shape. I am now terrified of losing it. I know they sell some pesticide stuff that you can use to treat the tree, but it takes 3 years to work.

QUOTE (Tex @ Jul 23, 2015 -> 09:48 AM) Aren't most of the fast food places owned by franchisees? I'm not certain McDonalds can close a franchise operation. McDonalds owns/operates a number of locations, but yeah, the vast majority are franchised out. It would be up to the individual owner/operator to close if the costs aren't worth it. McDonalds does have some control over how the franchise is run though, so if the owner is skimping on costs in certain areas to the point that they're not fulfilling their franchise obligations, conceivably McDonalds could take over the location and then close it down.

Weren't all those guys heavily involved in the movie?

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Jul 22, 2015 -> 11:28 AM) http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4214...-iran-agreement Most transparent Admin Evahhhh......... Well that's some BS.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jul 22, 2015 -> 11:56 AM) NYPD officers beat young black man who had his hands up over allegedly-stolen pizza Black officers it looks like.

I get the point, but in a sense it's meaningless. We're all supporters of child labor given our continued support of mobile technology (or really any cheaply made goods). But it's not like we're going to change anytime soon despite our collective agreement that child labor is a terrible thing. I think it's difficult to judge non-slave owning people back then since we're all doing the same exact thing now.

QUOTE (Tex @ Jul 22, 2015 -> 11:31 AM) So how many Jews did they kill? My wife asked if my grandparents spoke any German at home when I was growing up. I replied that with WW2 it was kind of uncool to speak German. Seriously it should be noted that the economy of the south was dependent on slave labor. Even if you did not personally own slaves you probably provided a product or service to a plantation. By this logic everyone in the world was a de-facto slave owner because everyone bought southern goods made/sourced by slave labor which then provided the financial resources necessary to continue the practice.

Spectre trailer dropped today and looks really good. I thought Skyfall was one of the better Bond films in a long, long time and this one looks to be a continuation of the story.

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jul 21, 2015 -> 04:49 PM) Just got an email that the Bears season tickets are in the mail! Unfortunately, I think their winning percentage will be worse than the Sox. However, the expectations are lower as well. I expected the Sox to be over .500 not so much for the Bears. If they win 6 games i'll be amazed.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 21, 2015 -> 04:57 PM) I have been forced to follow gawker saga on twitter. I can not believe the stupid petulence of the editors. That entire site/company needs to die. They've all climbed up each others' asses so far now they can't see what end is up. They have a lot of good writers, but it cracks me up that guys that ok'd dick pic posts or bear videos get on their editorial high horse when the bosses complain about a tabloid story that wasn't necessary (or even that entertaining). And what no one has really talked about is how Gawker themselves had a big piece about how outing people is not cool in response to that Dr. V post on Grantland. Yet they've outed people (Shepherd Smith) and this new guy. I'm not sure why there's any debate about the decision to take that story down. It went against their own group think. It was dumb. Who decided to take it down (editors or the suits) really isn't important.

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jul 21, 2015 -> 04:03 PM) How did Pixar let that one get made? Looks absolutely awful. Yeah i'm not sure that I get it.

So apparently JCL is in a walking boot?

QUOTE (shipps @ Jul 16, 2015 -> 03:58 PM) Berstein is one of the best out there when he is just having fun and joking around. He is also really great at tearing someone a new one when they deserve it. But he is AWFUL and unbearable when he gets on his high horse and angrily argues everyone else's point no matter what they say that makes sense. When he dissects every word someone says and disagrees with every part speaking over them without allowing a rebuttal. It drives me insane. That's him 99.9% of the time. I get the move for FoxSports, but at the same time, why not try to be the anti-ESPN by not hiring blowhards?

It depends on the length of the flight, but i'd do it to save $550. I hear if you buy the upgraded seat it's the same as any of the other airlines, i.e. it still sucks but it's not any worse. Not sure if that's available. If the flight is 4-6 hours, deal with it. $550 buys you a lot of extra crap at the location you're going to.