Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Jan 28, 2013 -> 09:32 AM) This team just flat out isn't good right now, and I'm really sad to see that the team didn't grow throughout the season as I expected them to under Groce. As mentioned before, clear out the roster aside from Egwu and Abrams, I have no faith in anyone else on that team to grow. I fully expect Ibby (forced by Groce) and Shaw (voluntary leave) to be gone, and Langford is on the hotseat as well. That's the most disappointing part. Abrams? No improvement, still disappears and gives the ball away too much. Bertrand? Totally disappeared and has zero confidence in his game. Paul has regressed badly. Richardson and Griffey are the same as they've always been. And then the bench gives you nothing. At this point Egwu and McLaurin are your two most consistent players, and neither can score. So, yeah. That's a problem. WTF happened to Henry? That guy was a natural scorer in high school. Klee used to think he was Illinois' best offensive weapon. He's terrible.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 28, 2013 -> 09:27 AM) 6-26 (.231) from behind the arc, 23-62 (.371) from the field. You say they shot well? It's Illinois basketball, not Northern Illinois Yeah I guess I turned it off shortly after halftime. At that point they had hit their 6 and were still down 8. To me shooting the three doesn't matter anymore because they're pretty awful at everything else.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Jan 28, 2013 -> 09:03 AM) I actually feel bad for KSU fans that their program is soon going to be ruined (not that there is a ton to ruin given their basketball history is mostly awful) and most of them actually know it is coming. Meh, I think he'll do well there. Expectations aren't as high, he's doesn't have the pressure to bring in 5* guys and finishing in the top 4 in the conference won't be that difficult. At Illinois he didn't recruit the right guys or missed out on guys and had no plan B. Hence why we're stuck without a decent PG or PF. I'm still in absolute shock that they've regressed so much. The morons on TV keep talking about the three ball, but that's not the issue. They shot well yesterday and still got beat easily. I really don't see this team making the tournament.

Where did Joseph Bertrand go?

For the record, the entire thing is bulls***. That is all.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 04:26 PM) Yeah it actually is. Lol Well shoot, everyone in the filibuster is suspended for three days then.

I was just stoking the fire btw. But I don't think that's suspension worthy either. We're all big boys/girls here.

I dunno, by "you" he could have meant all of "you" dirty hippy bleeding heart liberals.

QUOTE (Brian @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 01:15 PM) Any DAMAGES fans? Going to be my next venture on Netflix stream. My wife watched/liked it. I can't stand Glenn Close and the whole premise seemed dumb to me so I never did.

He didn't really attack a poster whereas you just did. SUSPEND THIS MAN.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 01:27 PM) Have you seriously not bought anything with pseudoephedrine in it in the last 5 years? They got it from locked cabinet. They didn't require me to register the box and I really doubt they report it to the authorities. But it's been a few years, so perhaps that's changed. And if so, that's f***ed up.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 01:21 PM) Go to a Walgreens and try to buy 30 boxes of Sudafed. LOL. Do they track sudafed purchases? Does everyone have to register for it?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 01:15 PM) gun stores do not have to keep inventories. background checks are destroyed within 24 hours. they don't have the tools or the information to systematically track straw purchases. still not sure why you're openly backing the gathering of information and the studying of it. even if you don't want to make a policy change based on that information, why would you oppose more understanding? Log all phone calls! Log all emails! There's gotta be useful information in there. f*** it! The ends justify the means!

Oh God. "lawful, lawful, lawful." Everything in there is keeping the government from infringing on the lawful owners lawful use of weapons. Nothing prevents police departments from keeping track - for criminal purposes - of anything you just mentioned. Edit: if that's all you got, i'm changing my opinion to openly backing the NRA's lobbying efforts there.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 12:53 PM) The states/counties/etc. are not allowed to collect certain types of data. FOIA doesn't mean s***. WHAT DATA!?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 09:55 AM) Actually the government has also banned the FBI from collecting and sharing most types of data involving guns. They can keep the most general statistics (like total number of incidents) but they can barely record anything else and they're limited in what they can share with even local law enforcement. But you know this is bulls*** because there are studies that have looking into the use of guns in shootings for your SYG argument and they rely on FBI data. And guess what, it's called FOIA. Start sending letters to state/county/state police departments and you can get all the information you want except names and contact information. I want to know what specific information you think people can't get. You want to prove that you're 10 times safer not using a gun, then crimes where guns are involved (readily available!) will give you that. This is just something else to b**** about with the NRA. I get it, they suck, they're an antiquated origination, but you're just b****ing to b**** over you're insanely unreasonable fear of guns.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 09:44 AM) Pertinent data must be available from the government to have a crack at a useful study You need FBI records and criminal records, both available publicly. What else would you need?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 09:33 AM) This would be wrong! Development of specific drugs might be undertaken by private companies, but virtually (or maybe literally now?) all basic research and public health research is done or funded by the government. The sort of research done privately is done in order to develop a marketable and profitable product. There's not much incentive or motive for the type of public policy research in question here. I guess show me a cite for this. My wife works daily on this very task - she gets rich people to give Rush money so that they can develop/research new medicine/tests/whatever. My mom works at Northwestern in the oncology unit doing her own research and her grant was privately funded. There are large health initiatives funded by the government, i'm not denying that. But the majority of medical innovation comes from chasing the almighty dollar - if you come up with a better machine/pill/test/whatever, you get rich.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 09:30 AM) What private institution has an economic benefit in doing that? No drug or medical research group is going to do that. That leaves charities...those aren't really reliable, they certainly don't fund a lot of basic research, and they have the NRA and their lobbyists to deal with if they try to put out such a study. When the CDC tried to do research on the subject in the 1990's, the government banned the CDC from doing so. When the NIH funded that study in Philadelphia that showed quite clearly that if you're carrying a gun, you're much more likely to die in a crime than if you're not carrying a gun, the Congress expanded that regulation to ban the NIH from doing more research. You seriously want to take on the NRA as a small charity? We're not talking about curing cancer, we're talking about doing a study on the impact of guns. A small research firm could handle that task pretty easily. One of your liberal think tanks should be able to do that pretty easily. There's absolutely no reason why the government "must" get involved with that. And yes, the NRA doesn't want it to be researched because the only conclusion is guns kill people when used improperly (shocking!) So of course that's going to sound awful. Biden and Obama and their counterparts will stand up and talk about how guns are killing children and innocent people, and they'll leave out that little statistic about it happening less than 1% of the time. It's absolutely a no-win situation for the NRA or gun advocates so I don't blame them.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 25, 2013 -> 09:28 AM) that guess would be horribly wrong. most research comes with grants from the government or the gov't footing the bill. independent research is mucho $$, thus if someone wants to do it and foot the bill, they probably have a bias one way or the other - wouldn't you think? Lol, you crack me up man. You're so sure of yourself and so wrong most of the time. Don't you think there's also much $$ to be made by the private sector? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_of_science No cite for this, but it comes from wikipedia so it must be true! Here's another that says the NIH accounts for 30% of all medical research, so I think less than 50% from government sources is accurate. http://news.medill.northwestern.edu/chicag...s.aspx?id=83157

What's stopping a private institution from doing this research? Medical research isn't confined to government entities or government grants, they do it privately all the time (in fact i'd guess most is privately funded).

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 24, 2013 -> 01:02 PM) yep. by suggesting investing in schools ive ruined their ability for upper mobility. makes sense. no child left behind. No, you've just wasted more money. What's your age/occupation btw Reddy? Just curious.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 24, 2013 -> 12:23 PM) This is why this is cyclical and self-reinforcing and why you need to look at and address what led that previous generation "to the streets" in the first place. Which is why even if legal racism was outlawed a few decades ago, there are still enormous lingering effects. Which is fine, do that, but also realize that simply throwing money at the problem isn't going to fix the problem. How's that public housing thing working out? Or food stamps? Those programs have declined over time right? Because giving people things causes a change in mentality/ways of life? Oh no wait, it doesn't. And it never has.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 24, 2013 -> 12:20 PM) lol thus why i said investment in schools would help. good teachers can make kids want to go to school. yeah, it won't fix all the problems, but it won't HURT taking a bunch of small steps is a lot better than doing nothing, like you're suggesting You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Having a cool teacher means jacks*** when you go home and have to dodge bullets or your older brother/father/uncle is dealing drugs and thieving and whatever else. You act as if a new teacher will suddenly change all of the roadblocks in these kids' lives.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Jan 24, 2013 -> 12:04 PM) i honestly disagree. i don't think you can overvalue the importance of role models regardless of where kids grow up. And where are the role models? At home? Nope. At school? Nope, they don't go (see the CPS wanting to close a bunch of schools because of a lack of attendance). The "role models" are in the streets, where these kids learn early on that money and street cred comes from a life of drugs and crime.