Jenksismyhero

Wow, parks and rec has dropped off so much. This last episode (the debate) was awful.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 02:59 PM) What circumstance exists which compels this hypothetical person to need the device in this neighborhood? A police official has several levels of protection beyond just being a police officer. They have more stringent legal punishments. They are constantly in contact with other authorities. They have authority granted to them by their position, where they can command you to respond to their requirements. None of those things exist for this hypothetical person who completes the same training level and is consistently updated and re-trained on the devices. If this person is carrying this weapon solely to protect themselves from a perceived risk of crime, then just by having the weapon, they've actually put everyone around them at more risk. So there needs to be some other reason why this person is compelled to have that weapon. This is not true. There's a high burden of proof for a plaintiff going after a cop (willful and wanton) than every day citizens (negligence). And it's almost unheard of for cops to be charged criminally with a shooting that ends in death. But again, Zimmerman's not just some vigilante with a gun. He's the neighborhood watch. He's in regular contact with the police department. He's licensed and certified to carry a gun. If he's being trained and certified on an annual basis (to whatever degree you want him to be trained/certified) i'm guessing you still wouldn't like him carrying a gun. All I know is despite the training and the badge, there are a lot of s***ty cops out there. Not sure why you think they're so much better than a well-trained private citizen.

Hmm, i don't get it. And I can't google anything to find out!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 02:42 PM) And I would define almost any circumstance where a person chooses to carry a gun in a residential zone (note that I said chooses, thus ruling out police) to be dangerous and unsafe, even if it is done within the current laws. What if he passed and/or obtained all available certifications and training by the police? Would it be ok then?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 02:42 PM) And I would define almost any circumstance where a person chooses to carry a gun in a residential zone (note that I said chooses, thus ruling out police) to be dangerous and unsafe, even if it is done within the current laws. According to Soxbadger that would still be a choice! He could get fired for not having his weapon, but it's still a choice!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 02:37 PM) Or, because a kid gets hit and killed by a car, you require a certain level of training, a certain level of safety, you set limits on where and how those devices can be operated, (speed limits), you strengthen those requirements in certain areas (stricter speed limits in residential areas), you require the device to be maintained in proper working condition, and require the installation of various types of safety equipment to try to prevent those incidents. I'm not here telling you that autos should be banned...but I am telling you that the person who tells you he or she is a good driver...isn't. But your "ban all guns" stance doesn't jive with a "more restrictions and training" position.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 02:33 PM) Because a kid gets hit and killed by a drunk driver and drunk driving penalties were laughably lax if enforced at all, MADD launched a decades-long campaign to get police and legislatures to address this serious problem and crack down on this unsafe behavior. Comparing it simply to driving cars is silly equivocation. Would you agree with the below? (1) Is the use of a gun, if done in accordance with various safety procedures and protocols, dangerous or unsafe? No. (2) Is the use of a vehicle, if done in accordance with various safety procedures and protocols, dangerous or unsafe? No. (3) Is the use of a gun, if done carelessly and negligently in violation of various safety procedures and protocols, dangerous or unsafe? Yes. (4) Is the use of a vehicle, if done if done carelessly and negligently in violation of various safety procedures and protocols, dangerous or unsafe? Yes.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 02:26 PM) See I'm not terrified when I'm using a power saw. I'm careful and cautious, but I'm not scared or afraid. This is true of the few times I've handled firearms as well. I was careful and deliberate in every action, but I wouldn't say I experienced fear. Where I won't disagree with you is that there are many people who are careless or at least less-than-stringently-careful with their firearms and that it leads to death and/or injury for them and others. And again, this goes back to just about anything that is inherently dangerous to a person's safety, like a car. So because a kid gets hit and killed by a drunk driver we should all be kept from driving cars. That's the logic train you guys are on with this Martin case.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 02:13 PM) Same way I haven't killed myself by using HF. By knowing that it's inherently unsafe, acting that way, and taking every safety precaution I can think of. And even then, I'm still amazed that s*** hasn't killed me. Scares the bejeezus out of me every time. I'm not going to sit here and tell you that I'm safe to use HF, because it's not. You do everything you can to avoid getting hurt by it, but it touches your skin, you're f***ed. Carrying around a loaded weapon and expecting the safety to protect you, or having weapons unlocked in a house...or having locked weapons where people can easily get to them...that's not acting like the item is inherently unsafe. So basically your argument is that anyone that uses a gun will use it negligently, thus it's better just to ban them altogether.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 02:11 PM) What are the number of accidental gun injuries and deaths compared to power tool injuries and deaths? They're both dangerous tools, but guns more so. You're a better googler than me, but i'd be willing to bet a lot that there are certainly more injuries from power tools than guns. That s*** happens daily, especially on work sites. Deaths, eh, the accidental discharge death has to be pretty rare, but i'm less sure on that.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 02:04 PM) Guns are designed to fire a projectile at high speed with the intent to kill or seriously damage the target. Accidental discharges are not extremely rare events, and sometimes a gun can just blow up (this literally happened this week during training some co-workers were providing). Not all guns have safeties, either, such as Glocks. Guns are different in that their design intent is to fire a lethal projectile. My table saw is designed to cut wood. Their intended use doesn't matter when you're debating whether something is inherently dangerous. Guns and power tools are inherently dangerous and life threatening if not used properly. If used properly, unless you win the product liability lottery, both can (and are) used safely, without issue, for the vast, vast majority of people.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 02:02 PM) Certainly is for me. The end result of not doing so is potentially a serious injury. Taking steps to avoid that out of a fear of suffering a serious injury is what I'd classify it as. Anyway...that's what I mean when I say I'm afraid of the person who isn't afraid of a gun. I'm afraid of the person who tells you that they know how to handle it safely. Really mean that. Because in my view...I don't go telling people I'm trustworthy, I take actions to demonstrate that. Carrying around a concealed weapon, unless you're in a situation where there's a decent chance you're going to run into a bear, is almost always, IMO, an act that demonstrates a person has simply lost respect for that weapon. They think they can control it. OMG dude. Have you ever handled a gun before? Seriously?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 01:55 PM) No, you can't. Why the hell not? You're speculating that more justifiable killings (by number) means more preventable deaths. Why can't I speculate that all of those people were going to be murdered but not for their justifiable killing?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 01:53 PM) Guns are significantly more dangerous than my power tools by design. I don't necessarily agree with this. A router or table saw or chop saw is an exposed metal blade that can slice off a hand with little effort. To hurt yourself with a gun requires more steps (turning the power on v. unlocking the safety and pulling the trigger). Still, the point is ANYTHING can be used, purposefully or accidentally, as a killing device. Guns are no different.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 01:49 PM) I'm afraid of anyone who says they aren't afraid of guns. And that pretty much tells me everything I need to know about your stance on this issue. Guns are as dangerous as anything else - your car, a power tool, whatever. Are you afraid of your car too?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 01:43 PM) Well...first of all...when the purpose of a device is "To kill", and there are tens of millions of handguns and hundreds of millions of other guns in this country..."A percent or two" is a massacre. And secondly, you've misread the article. The 288% increase was in deaths that were found to be justifiable. So that doesn't count any that were eventually deemed unjustified. And what evidence do you have that those weren't justifiable killings? You're going from 12 to 35. That's not exactly a gigantic number. If it went from 12 to 300 you'd have a better argument. And btw I can easily spin that back on you and claim that this law just saved an extra 23 people from being innocently murdered.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 11:49 AM) But the more expansive these concealed carry laws get, and the more expansive these "Self defense" laws get, the more they're going to happen. As we already noted, "Justified homicides" tripled in florida after passing of their version. Zero evidence to back that up, either from the perspective that CC laws are going to be more "expansive" (as I've said before, the SYG principle was just codified, it already existed in the common law in the vast majority of states as a defense) or that more killings of innocent people will happen. And the triple homicides claim came from one article that simply posted a number. It didn't say how many cases actually applied the SYG law or how many were successful. It just means more people tried to use it. If you were a defendant that shot someone i'm pretty sure you'd try to throw it in your case as a possible defense too. This entire issue comes down to a simple subset of people: people that are afraid of guns and people that aren't. For some reason people that are have this unrealistic expectation that having a gun means you're going to use it against another person. I'm guessing the statistics of that are incredibly low, like less than a percent or two.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 11:56 AM) All I know is, it better end within the next 2-3 episodes. I am getting bored w/ this story. At some point, you have to reward the audience for putting things together and figuring it out, but then they throw a curveball that changes everything. The writer of the show said this Larson case DOES get resolved in S2 and a new case begins, so I am hoping it's pretty soon. I'm going to enjoy the lynch mob when they reveal the killer, it's someone now one knows about, and then the next season (or two) is the case about trying to track that person down and charge him

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 02:11 AM) Hmm....

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 02:06 AM) I'm looking at this Spurs roster. O.M.G. Popovich is the clear-cut choice for COY. Manu Ginobili has missed more games than Rose. And in the games he's played, he's sported his worst across-the-board numbers since 2004. Tim Duncan is barely half the player he was in his prime. Parker has had his normal good year. But let's break down the rest of this Spurs roster (most of it): DeJuan Blair: a second round pick, is their starting C at 6'7, in the west. Danny Green: another second round pick, who had 28 career games played coming into this year. Patty Mills: are you serious? Where the hell did he come from? Another (late) second round pick. Kawhi Leonard: did anybody know who this guy was before this season? Gary Neal: undrafted These are like their top guys. The west is clearly better than the east. The west is 156-114 against the east this season. If you narrow it down to only playoff teams, the west's top 8 is 100-44 against the eastern conference (east playoff teams are only 74-70 against the west). This is a severe no-brainer. Thibs did a tremendous job this year. Rose, while great, is nowhere near as valuable (at least in the regular season) as I thought he was. But Popovich, in a much better conference, has been god-like. There's nothing to discuss here. This is almost as easy as LeBron and his third MVP that's coming next month. Dejuan Blair was an absolute steal of a draft pick. And Green was always a pretty high ceiling guy. IMO Thibs did a better job because he lost 3 of his starts for a pretty significant amount of the year and still won with a bunch of no name scrubs. Are your numbers about the east/west playoff teams against other playoff teams only, or the whole division? The bottom of the east is clearly worse than the bottom of the west.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 08:15 AM) I'm trying to get the Texas perspective, not the Pasadena, CA transplant to Knoxville, TN perspective. The problem with people "taking back their neighborhood," especially one that is so crime ridden that police patrols and arrests are not having much effect, is the degree to which you now step up the potential of things like innocent people being shot and killed. I think you and I agree on that. I get the frustration. I get the desire to not rely on an ineffective police force. I get the desire to just do something different. But choosing an even worse alternative, which is inserting untrained or ill-trained civilians into high-danger situations, and adding weapons to that equation, does not strike me as something that has much potential to remedy the situation. This is the first case of its kind that i've heard of. I'm sure there have been more, but I think it's safe to say it's rare. I think your guys' fear of vigilante watch captains shooting innocent people they think are criminals is a bit exaggerated.

Anyone have their own compost bins/piles at home? My wife and I were thinking about getting the big bin that you rotate. One, it provides you some good additives for the garden, but two, we can get rid of that disgusting smell from the garbage from old food (no garbage disposal).

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 27, 2012 -> 08:47 AM) We have to buy garbage stickers at something like $3.50 a piece for garbage. It's a giant pain in the ass having to go to the grocery story at 10PM because you realize you're out of stickers. On the other hand, since you have to pay $3.50 a can for garbage but can put out unlimited recycling cans for free, it really does encourage people to recycle. Everyone has at least one recycling bin, some people have two or three alongside their one garbage can. La Grange is the same way. I ended up getting a couple of extra recycling bins (3 total) and that's probably 60-70% of our weekly trash. I put out a couple of recycling bins every week and the trash every other week. Though in 8 weeks when the first kid comes i'm sure it'll be more.

Wow, Beckman and Illinois land a huge commit: 4* QB Aaron Bailey, #6 QB overall in the nation, one of the best Midwest prospects. That's huge.

Catching Fire.......MEH. First half, god awful love crap (have to keep reminding myself that this book was meant for 12 year old girls more than a 30 year old man). Second half MUCH better, but the arena was really difficult to visualize. And ultimately the ending left me a little unsatisfied (knowing it's book 2 out of 3 tends to kill any suspense) Onto MockingJay....