Y2HH

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 23, 2013 -> 09:04 AM) LOL. I'll leave it to someone else to predict what the response to this will be and why it can't possibly ever be considered. It can easily be considered. You are only federalizing gun crime. Not LEGAL ownership of guns. I'm not suggesting anything that overturns local guns laws. Those laws remain the same. The only change you make at the federal level is imposing a MINIMUM sentence, so the local judges can't just let you off with a warning, like they're doing now. All it is, is a federal mandate that if you are arrested for a gun violation, you do a MINIMUM prison sentence without possibility of parole. That's all. The local courts can still try the case, but if found guilty, they have to abide by the minimum sentence set by the feds.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 23, 2013 -> 08:39 AM) If we used this non-logic we could just get rid of every law we have and not pass any again, ever. After all, criminals won't follow them. What's the point? The point is these laws are there for when criminals DO break them, we have a means to do something about it. The issue is, we aren't. In Chicago, if you are caught with a gun illegally, there is about a 70% chance you do zero time for it. This is exactly why we have laws...so when we catch people with illegal guns, they're put away for a spell to send a message to them and their friends that it's a one way ticket to the big house. We aren't doing that now with the laws we have now. So like you said, what's the point in having laws we aren't enforcing anyway? I understand the jails are full, but they always seem to have money for stuff...so borrow more and build more. Way more. But keep the people safer than you're keeping them now. But because they robbed the pensions in a state with an amendment protecting pensions they have to shut down prisons? I don't think so. Invalid excuse. http://bit.ly/13V7UiB

QUOTE (Tex @ Apr 22, 2013 -> 07:34 PM) The part of this I find silly is the argument that criminals will not follow the law so it wouldn't stop x, y, or z from happening. Of course not. By definition criminals break laws, that is why we call them criminals. Laws establish the punishment. Capone didn't pay taxes on his criminal profits and went to jail. Of course criminals will not pay taxes, but it's why he is in jail. So when the police catch someone with a gun and no background check, etc. or any other legal nicety, the criminal does time. No need to wait for him to commit a more violent crime. I think the issue I have with this is how they're going about it. If they want to solve this, then solve it, stop trying to use round about methods and/or political deception to make it look like you're doing something. It's become another dog and pony show to make it appear they're "trying". Federalize gun crime. Problem solved, across the board. If you have a gun, register it, and you have X days to do so before the new law goes into effect. Have a valid FOID card, etc. Basically, you have to follow all the local laws, just as you're supposed to be doing now. Be sure that that law understands there are people that "own" guns, hidden somewhere in their basements they have no idea they even have. When such a gun is found, it will be obvious it hasn't been used, simple ballistics will show that. You obviously don't arrest such people. What it will do is send the message that if you're pulled over, or found with a gun illegally...have a nice time in prison for the next few years. The message will spread quickly. Also, stop with the call to ban assault weapons right now, because they aren't even the issue. After you solve the actual issue, go back and look into determining what level of "weaponry" is not legal for a citizen. For example, an atomic bomb, or a bazooka. But first, solve the issue we have on hand. I say this because these fabled "assault weapons" aren't even being used in these crimes.

Stupidville.

I may be a sheep that got lost, but I actually hope Hell exists so they can both burn there for f***ing eternity. Asshole f***face coward pieces of s***.

QUOTE (buhbuhburrrrlz @ Apr 19, 2013 -> 01:45 PM) Originally from Chechnya, but living in the United States since five years, Tamerlan says: "I don't have a single American friend, I don't understand them." Tamerlan fled Chechnya with his family because of the conflict in the early 90s, and lived for years in Kazakhstan before getting to the United States as a refugee. Tamerlan says he doesn't usually take his shirt off so girls don't get bad ideas: "I'm very religious." Tamerlan says he doesn't drink or smoke anymore: "God said no alcohol." A muslim, he says: "There are no values anymore," and worries that "people can't control themselves." He also had a section of his youtube titled "Terrorists" 1) How surprising. A religious person that kills, maims and destroys innocent people. Way to have morals and do the exact opposite of what pretty much every religion preaches. 2) People have no values. So, let's take innocent lives? Right. Sound logic. 3) People can't control themselves. And neither could you. Moron.

Relevant if not already posted...

The news right now: http://qkme.me/3tzsgx

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 19, 2013 -> 11:18 AM) http://instagram.com/p/YSnkv2ssV9/ stay classy! Both sides have taken sad opportunities to politicize this.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 19, 2013 -> 11:02 AM) I dunno, why is Osborne's answer to the UK's sputtering economy "MORE AUSTERITY!"? People in power can wrongly believe things in spite of lots of evidence. Either way, it's not really relevant. It could be 'effective' to shoot a suspect's family members one by one until they confess, but it would still be morally reprehensible (not to mention completely illegal). The case against torture isn't a pragmatic one, it's a philosophical one. I agree. I just don't think the government does. It's obvious the previous administration didn't agree, but I don't think the current one does, either. I think they absolutely believe it works, and their actions say as much. And I believe it's still going on, just under deeper cover.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 19, 2013 -> 10:56 AM) They issued an "Executive order" against it but then chose not to pursue prosecutions. I think the "not pursuing prosecutions" part says an awful lot to me. I agree, it says it all as far as I'm concerned. But that goes back to my original point...for all the proof it doesn't work, why does the government appear in almost every regard to believe it does?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 19, 2013 -> 10:51 AM) When did this part happen? So Obama and his cabinet aren't against torture? I was pretty sure they are outwardly against it and have said as much.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 19, 2013 -> 10:47 AM) Why couldn't you pass a psych test while (wrongly) believing that torture is morally justified in some circumstances? Hell, are you even superficially knowledgeable about all of the terrible s*** the CIA has been involved with around the world e.g. most of Central and South America since at least the 50's? Oh, I know, but when the highest people in power are against it, why aren't they getting rid of it? For all their talk, it seems to still be rampant throughout all levels of the government involved in terror. I'm just pointing out that they while they say it doesn't work, the actual actions of the government say otherwise, because they're still doing it.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 19, 2013 -> 10:42 AM) And they also are required to and trained to carry out orders. In some cases, even illegal orders. So again, answer the questions I asked. If it doesn't work, and the leaders in charge say it doesn't work, and it's illegal, why do they hire people to do it and order them to do it? It's pretty obvious they're in on it at a pretty high level. Someone is purposefully seeking out pretty mean people that couldn't possibly pass one of those psych evaluations in a legit fashion in order to torture people. Sounds to me like another case of, listen to what we say, not what we do. It's obvious that people in very powerful positions of the FBI, CIA and the military believe it works, and are going out of their way to make sure they have people around capable of carrying it out for them.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 19, 2013 -> 10:40 AM) There's no extensive psych evaluations necessary for political positions. Politicians aren't carrying out torture orders, either. So it wasn't even the question I asked. The people in the FBI, or CIA carrying out these orders ARE required to pass such evaluations.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 19, 2013 -> 10:32 AM) The US indisputably engaged in widespread torture after 9/11, according to a new report. Effectiveness shouldn't even be a part of the equation (Is torture morally wrong? Yes. Always.), but even if you insist on including it, it turns out (just as many people have been saying forever!) that it doesn't actually work. I'm sure we'll get around to prosecuting people for these war crimes sooner or later. I have to ask, if it doesn't work, why do they continue to do it, even if "behind closed doors"? Are you and others claiming that the people who work for the government that carry out these orders are sick individuals that are mentally ill and love to see people suffer, IE, actual sociopaths? If so, how do they have jobs that require extensive psych evaluations to attain? Is the government purposefully employing these people to do these things that they outwardly say don't work? Is the government further, making sure these sickos are passing these psych evaluations so they have people on staff to do these things, that again, they say doesn't even work? If so, why? I'm not for torture, I'm just asking the questions nobody seems to be asking themselves.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Apr 17, 2013 -> 05:11 PM) f*** this country. it was a bad bill, but it was a f***ing bill. we're useless. Passing a bill that doesn't solve the problem just for the sake of passing a bill is what's useless.

I'd go, but I still don't see how people say they "love the park", because the park flat out sucks. Everything about it is just bad. I have no issues with loving the history, not that it's a very good history, but I at least get that. But loving the physical structure itself is an exercising in "loving" bad.

Science, yo.

No matter who actually did it, I'm sure AQ will claim credit anyway, which should do wonders in starting more wars.

Sigh.

Based on the photo posted by deadspin, situation looks really bad/bloody. http://deadspin.com/explosions-reported-at...athon-473008941

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 15, 2013 -> 02:13 PM) Wow. Pray that everyone is OK. People have reportedly lost limbs in the blasts...supposedly spectators.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Apr 15, 2013 -> 02:04 PM) I may have missed you post it elsewhere, but how long have you been working to get back to that? Eh, a few months I guess, but I don't know if I was specifically working to get back there as a goal or I'm sure I would have tried it a while ago now. I never have a spotter, so I tend to not push it on barbells much...today I had a spotter and tried it out, though, and was able to do it. I just assumed I couldn't before I tried.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 15, 2013 -> 10:55 AM) My work requires that I travel occasionally, which means that I get to see many different parts of the country as well as build up points/miles for personal use. Last week I had to fly into Baltimore for a day, so I took the opportunity to head to the Sox-Nats game and meet up with lostfan. I only got to meet Lostfan once in real life, but he's a solid dude, really nice.