illinilaw08

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 12, 2015 -> 10:27 AM) Because their employer is probably a s*** head that factors in a percentage of their pay to tips and they rely on that additional piece. I take it you've never actually worked in the service industry. I'm all for paying a living wage to people in the service industry - then they don't have to rely on me as a consumer to subsidize their wages. The tipping model as a whole is annoying - plenty of consumers take advantage, and there are more unwritten rules than baseball (there are people who don't tip on liquor, do you tip on carry-out, etc.). In an ideal world, everyone in the service industry would be paid a living wage, and they wouldn't rely on the consumer tipping on the service. Until that day comes, I'll continue to tip and tip well...

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 10, 2015 -> 04:13 PM) Then again I feel the same way about the Dem primary. I get that if you lean right and are looking at Sanders. And I get disliking the Clintons generally. But I'm not clear what policies Clinton is pushing - either socially or fiscally - that would make you feel that way. But I'd be interested to be educated otherwise... I can point to the majority of the candidates on the right running primaries that are appealing to their base - socially and fiscally - including fairy tale regressive tax policies that would require trillions in cuts to cover.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 10, 2015 -> 03:16 PM) I can appreciate the sentiment, but you guys are getting excited about beating/losing closely to bad teams. Actual playoff teams they've been pretty non-competitive. I mean, sure, they're not getting crushed like the pats/packers games like last year, but that's when the franchise basically bottomed out. 4 games against playoff(ish) teams at the moment. - Competed with GB - Lost as time expired vs. Minnesota (6-2, no matter what you might think of them) - Blown out vs. AZ, but down 28-20 while Cutler was playing - Blown out by Seattle with Clausen. So other than the 3 halves with Clausen under center, the Bears have actually been ok. Not playoff good. But they've competed in every other game. Certainly a vast improvement over last year.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 6, 2015 -> 03:41 PM) I'm not hooked on him yet as to where I'd say I fully support him winning. I'm just saying at this point in time it appears only 4 candidates have a shot. So in Greg's world AT THIS TIME they are. ... Hillary -- I feel she is mean to people beneath her, she is very rude, she feels entitled, is very rich (if we're talking lies how about that lie she gave about how poor she was) and just not the type of person you would want to reward with the highest office. Bernie Baby - I kind of like him. Not saying I wouldn't ultimately vote for him. Got to be honest don't like the voice very much (many voters are superficial). Carson - I'm ready to try something new. Sick of politicians. He's Donald Trump light if you compare candidates to beers. Also not crazy about his voice. Trump - I'd be willing to give it to him, slam dunk, but like Hillary, this guy is elitist and entitled and pretty full of himself, just as Hilly is full of herself. If Trump would promise to shut up for six months after winning and just work on the economy I might go for him. There are just four candidates and right now I like the non traditional Carson. You didn't answer my question. Unless your response is that your vote is entirely based on superficial factors and has nothing to do with their policies...

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 6, 2015 -> 03:03 PM) The state of Journalism is Very very sad. Carson camp saying the story is false. I'm so sick of gotcha Journalism. Nobody cares, though. They'll see the headlines and say, "See, Hillary is the choice!!!!!" Yahoo article ... “[Carson] never said he was admitted or even applied,” Watts reportedly told the Daily Caller. “This is what we’ve come to expect from Politico.” Conservative political commentator and Carson friend Armstrong Williams defended the candidate in an interview with The Washington Post, arguing that it’s Politico who is guilty of “shoddy journalism.” Williams notes that Carson never claimed to have applied to West Point. In fact, Carson has said a number of times, in “Gifted Hands” and elsewhere, that he only had $10 to spend on college applications, forcing him to narrow his options to one: Yale. “Dr. Carson boasts about his scores in ROTC. Westmoreland encourages him to apply,” Williams told the Post. “As Dr. Carson says, they were impressed by his scores, but he never applied. They said to him, we could get you in. This guy got into Yale—obviously he could have got in. The headline was a fabrication.“ Not that this is the thing that should stop Carson from being President, but in the book he literally says, "Later I was offered a full scholarship to West Point." Note that nowhere in Carson's campaign's defense do they allege that Carson was offered a full scholarship to West Point. Thus, that statement in the book is still erroneous. But yeah, maybe the media should spend more time talking about how the guy thinks God gave the Egyptians the knowledge to build the pyramids in order to allow them to store grain for long periods. Or about how his tax plan would absolutely bankrupt the country. Greg, what policies of Carson do you like? Why?

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 6, 2015 -> 12:15 AM) Not to be a contrarian asshole, but if the students were carrying guns, once the perpetrator whipped out the knife, boom, shoot him in the leg and incident is over. It's dangerous out there and I am all for the bad guys taking a bullet in the butt or the leg when they are wielding knives and guns. I know that you've been told this before, but you do understand it's very hard to intentionally shoot a moving target in the leg right? And if the shooter misses, we might go from zero fatalities in this case to more than zero fatalities. Because each of these hypothetical armed students will not be marksmen.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Nov 2, 2015 -> 01:29 PM) Why does Illinois not tax pensions? How much revenue are we forgoing? I'm pretty sure it's to incentivize retirees staying in state. Don't tax income, but pick up the property and consumption taxes. Note, I'm not opining on the policy to not tax pensions, but I'm pretty sure that's the rationale...

QUOTE (Brian @ Nov 2, 2015 -> 10:57 AM) Zach Norvell to Gonzaga. No clue why Illinois didn't try harder for him. He's better than DJ Williams. Different skillset with Williams and Norvell, so that's kind of comparing apples to oranges. But Norvell is kind of redundant behind JCL and Aaron Jordan. Need a point guard (check), big (5th year transfer?) and a wing that defends and can play the 3/4. Already have a bunch of guys that project as scoring wings...

QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 30, 2015 -> 04:00 PM) The least disruptive is following the classroom procedures, putting away the phone, and participating in class. Wow, get an education. But the student isn't wrong here. The next least disruptive is following the teacher's directions. Wow, get an education. But the student isn't wrong here. The next least disruptive (long term) is following the administrator's directions. Wow, get an education. But the student isn't wrong here. The fourth least disruptive is following the directives from the cop. Wow, get an education. But the student isn't wrong here. But we can't expect a student to follow rules. How dare anyone enforce any rules on kids? Talk after class? And she continues to sit there and use her phone ignoring the lessons? You will eventually lose that classroom and have zero respect from your students. If she doesn't have to follow the rules why should anyone else? What I did in that same situation when the student said, and I am quoting directly, "f*** you, you can't take my phone" (during a test). I let him sit in class. Then the next day I placed all the students into assigned seats, I made them put away all their ear buds, all their hats, and any other infraction I found. After a couple days I went back to my relaxed ways. But the peer pressure is working. But if he does the same thing a couple more times, I'll be writing him up regularly. If he continues to escalate do you really expect me to say "we'll talk after class?" What do you think he will say to me? I'm sorry? LOL No one in this thread has excused the girl's behavior. At what point is "forcibly pull her out of the desk and drag her across the floor" a reasonable response? If we are dealing with degrees bad behavior, the officer's behavior is significantly worse than that of the kid. Sounds like you had a good solution to resolve a similar situation. I'll note that you did not call security to drag the kid out of the classroom....

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 30, 2015 -> 02:12 PM) They make the $$$$$$ Disney is requiring them to shave off hundreds of millions over the next few years. Despite record revenues. The fact that Skip Bayless and Stephen A. Smith make the money makes me very, very sad. I'll miss Grantland. It was an easy one stop for both pop culture and sports. Like you Jenks, I went there multiple times a day.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 29, 2015 -> 03:11 PM) He doesn't HAVE to be though. We just keep making that position more and more important. Like he has to be the one championing X legislation before it can be done. He is LITERALLY one-third of the branches of the federal government. If I'm remembering my civics right, that means that this one guy has always had the power to veto legislation passed by the majority of 535 people in the chamber below him. At what point in our nation's history did the Office of the Presidency NOT dictate policy at every level of the federal government?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 29, 2015 -> 01:45 PM) It's a joke because the PRESIDENT shouldn't be concerning himself over a relatively small problem like daily fantasy sports. That's why we have state governments and federal departments and, I dunno, f***ing Congress that investigates and legislates these sorts of issues. This is precisely why our system is so f***ed up. We expect this one person to magically solve all the world's problems. He's one f***ing guy. And 99% of the time, he doesn't do s*** to effectuate change. He's a poster boy. He gives speeches. I'd vote for the next candidate that says "i'm going to step back and let Congress decide wtf to do in this country. I'll worry about how we look and how we interact with our allies. Everything else i'll just help enforce." You're right. It's totally not important to know the policy positions of Presidential candidates on relevant topics in Washington... He's one guy who wields veto power over everything that comes through the legislature. He's one guy who dictates all policy in the executive branch. He's a pretty damn important guy.... Again - this is a multi-billion dollar industry that the government attempt to shut down. The executive can certainly clear some of the regulatory uncertainty surrounding that industry...

QUOTE (LDF @ Oct 29, 2015 -> 12:55 PM) well you may have a point. but unless Christie states it in ref to legalize gambling or anything like that, then i don't see it being a valid question. i am not reading into any questions except for what is exactly asked. it is just me. Congressional committees have been formed to look into whether daily fantasy sites should continue to be allowed, or if they should be categorized as gambling. The FBI and the Justice Department are doing their own investigations. Because they are a multi-billion dollar industry that is under scrutiny by Washington, the issue is relevant to a Presidential debate. Jeb Bush turned the question into a joke by talking about his 7-0 fantasy football team - entirely different than the DFS issue and therefore not relevant to the question. Then Christie exploded about how ISIS and Al-Qaida are more important than fantasy football (again, ignoring the issues with DFS sites which is what the question specifically referenced) and everybody said, "what a dumb question!"

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 29, 2015 -> 10:52 AM) Oh so the question was about the legal issues? Fair enough, that makes sense. I haven't seen that one yet. http://deadspin.com/chris-christie-flips-o...anta-1739388837 Deadspin has the video in the above link.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 29, 2015 -> 09:55 AM) I thought Fox did the best, CNN they were a bit of pushovers but fair, but these guys were the pits. I thought their were a lot of bad questions that I had no interest in. The fantasy football question to Bush was just horrid and to be frank, their were a couple times where I felt that it was the moderators who were flat out lying (vs. the candidates). Republican's need to get some of these guys out of the race. Carson had an interesting strategy...just stay a fly on the wall...yeah you won't take a step forward but I think he knows this is not an arena he shines. Carly and Rubio continue to dominant the debate format and it looks more an more evident to me that eventually, when the dust unfolds, Rubio is going to be the next candidate and he is one of the guys on that stage I'd vote for. I'd vote for him, Jeb or Kasich and to be frank I have no issues with Christie or Carly either. I actually think Carly would be the best but I don't think she can stand up and beat out the smear campaign they'll push on her (including her own audio bytes from the layoffs / outsourcing). To be frank, those sound clips don't bother me, I understand the realities of business, but it just isn't a rhetoric that a huge voting base will get their arms around. I'd love to see Carly blow Clinton out of the water, it would just be amazing TV. Rubio will have to take a closer look at his tax plan though, zero capital gains taxes are going to be a tough selling point given who directly benefits (you can argue indirect benefits of it...but the direct benefits are the wealthiest people in this country). When did you think the moderators were flat out lying? I saw the critique of the tax question to Rubio (a bad question, granted). Whether the moderator was lying regarding that question comes down to interpretation though. The Conservative tax foundation gave the largest benefits under Rubio's plan to the bottom 10%, but the top 1% see the second largest benefit under the Plan. The question was bad, don't get me wrong, but I'm not sure it was a lie. A graph of benefits by income level is in the link below. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/10/29...onds-with-this/ Ultimately, though, I agree with you. Lots of bad questions. The opening question in particular was absolutely awful (what's your biggest weakness?). On Rubio, I tend to agree. I'd also like to hear how he plans to make up the $6T in revenue the cuts produce. For a debate that was supposed to focus on the economy, I'd have liked to actually heard the candidates discuss, I don't know, economic policy?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 29, 2015 -> 10:34 AM) I agree on Fox doing the best debate so far, no question. I only watched the first half, so I didn't catch the fantasy football question - that's pretty stupid. Regulation of daily fantasy sports sites is an issue in Washington at the moment. So that's certainly a relevant question (though there are certainly more important policy issues that should be discussed). In fact, given Christie's attempts to legalize sports gambling in New Jersey, it's arguably quite relevant to Christie in particular. The fact that Jeb Bush took the question as an opportunity to gloat about his non-daily fantasy team being 7-0 made the question seem stupid.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 28, 2015 -> 12:44 PM) I agree with you. As to point 1, people want the one big recruit to put them over the edge. That hasn't happened yet. And yes, that's happened the last 25 years or so at Illinois. Were they always blue chip recruits? No, but they were very, very good, program leading recruits. Deon Thomas, Kiwane Garris, Frank Thomas, Brian Cook, Sergio McClain, Dee Brown, etc. (notice the PG theme there). That hasn't happened yet. But again, let's put context around those recruits: 1) Deon Thomas - during the Henson and Jimmy Collins era and the recruitment that got Illinois placed on probation. 2) Garris - I don't remember Garris being highly ranked. Also happened during the Henson and Collins era. I'm not disputing that Henson and Collins recruited well in Chicago. 3) Frank Williams - Once Sergio and Griffin committed to Illinois (and Sergio, while the guy that got Griffin and Williams to follow was the lightest recruited of that group), the Williams recruitment was over. Also a downstate recruitment (just like Sergio). 4) Cook was from Lincoln. He was never going anywhere other than Illinois. 5) Dee was a big pickup. But Sean Dockery was more heavily recruited in state that year (ending up at Duke). If I remember right, Michigan State was the primary competition for Dee. Deron then fell into Self's lap when UNC and Georgia Tech landed Felton and Jack respectively. Yes, Groce needs to recruit good players. His first class will be Juniors this year. There are, conservatively, at least four Groce recruits that could be All Big Ten players during their careers here (Hill, Nunn, JCL and Black) based on pedigree or on court production to date. At least two of those guys historically don't end up at Illinois. The big problem at Illinois is that they haven't been putting guys in the NBA since the '05 team left. Deron (best known as a coach killing malcontent at the moment) and Leonard (getting his first chance to start!). But you can't blame Groce for not putting players into the NBA when his first class is just now Juniors...

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 28, 2015 -> 12:03 PM) While I agree with you here, this sounds an awful lot like the excuses that were made for Weber the last 5 seasons. Oh well he missed on this guy, oh well this guy never panned out, oh well he had problems with this guy, etc. I think there's a difference between excuses and ensuring that the proper context surrounds a discussion. 1) People are holding Groce to an historically unrealistic standard regarding recruiting (why doesn't he land 5 star recruits!!). Groce needs to fix the point guard situation, and hopefully Lucas is that guy. But other than point guard, recruiting has been good. 2) It's important to remember that Webber and Groce inherited very different programs. Webber inherited a program loaded with experienced talent (the core of the '05 team all played a ton in Self's first year) that would ultimately be the '05 team. Despite that, Webber was not able to recruit at an acceptable level until '09. By contrast, Groce inherited a program coming off a 6-12 B1G season that lost its lottery pick center. Without that context, I don't know how you can adequately evaluate Groce as a coach right now. Webber had some bad luck (Jamar Smith, the Carlwell crash, Eric Gordon), but he also had a large enough sample size that we knew his strengths and weaknesses. Groce has 3 full years in. One with Webber's holdovers where he overachieved, one with a gutted roster (the massive outflow of transfers) that was about at expectations (bubble team that just missed the tournament), and one that fell short of expectations, partially due to factors outside Groce's control (read, injuries). I don't see how you can discuss Groce without providing context to the events during his tenure here. And that's where I acknowledge that this is a huge season for Groce. The '17 class is loaded and deep in Illinois generally, and south of I-80 specifically. As bigruss said, if Groce doesn't win this year and has a lackluster '17 recruiting class, the heat should be on.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 28, 2015 -> 10:55 AM) Yeah...I was aware of the banking issue and I would presume you'll have some state savings & loans pop up, but problem is you are out of luck having any form of FDIC protection, I believe. Not an expert but interesting and I presume someone is going to jump in and tackle the banking issue. The fact that 1 in 11 commercial buildings rae being used for marijuana is yet another reason I wouldn't vote. I wouldn't want 1 in 11 commercial buildings being used for booze or strip clubs either. Should have clarified that it's a lot of warehouses and grow facilities in addition to actual dispensaries. And yeah, it's a risk to open a business that's afoul of federal law, but bringing this back to my original point, Colorado is a swing state with 9 electoral votes that could go either way (in my lifetime, only '92, '08 and '12 were democrat wins in CO). Christie and, to a lesser degree Rubio, would have a pretty hard time winning CO because of the impact federal enforcement of recreational marijuana would have on the state economy. Edit to include the link... http://www.denverpost.com/marijuana/ci_289...estate-recovery

QUOTE (bigruss22 @ Oct 28, 2015 -> 07:59 AM) Weber's "top" recruiting classes also stunk, like really stunk. His best recruiting was the underrated guys that fit his system, but when he went after rankings he got guys that were either terrible or didn't fit in. Let's look at his 2010 and 2011 classes, some of his best ranked ones: 2011 - 17th Abrams, Egwu, Henry, Shaw, Ibby, Langford. He got 2 good players out of that. Henry was good but unfortunately left the program to play the 3 at Depaul (only to end up playing the 4 and 5 there as well). Shaw, Ibby and Langford were all non-D1 major program caliber players. Shaw just announced he's hanging it up at Bradley, Ibby parely plays at SIU, Langford went to a DII school I believe. 2010 - 11th Jereme Richmond, Meyers Leonard, Crandall Head. Only Leonard was good and even then he left before he could be a stud. Weber was not coaching well and was not identifying good talent for the program when he got canned. He got fired for good reason, wanting to go back to him is meatheadness. Groce has not been spectacular, I don't think anyone here has said that in about a year or two now. Yep. Also of note, people tend to overstate past Illinois recruiting success. Jimmy Collins was the only Illinois recruiter to ever really pull top talent out of Chicago. Other than that period in the 80s (pre-probation), and the brief Self era, Illinois basketball has been successful when the talent downstate has been strong. Kruger didn't need Chicago because three straight Mr. Basketballs were south of I-80. The point here is that Illinois has never recruited well nationally, and has never consistently landed the best kids from Chicago. The expectation on Groce should be that he recruits at a high level regionally. And Groce has done that. Leron Black and JCL are recruits Illinois doesn't have a shot with historically. Memphis and Indiana are not traditional recruiting areas for the Illini. Groce deserves more credit than he gets for landing those guys. The other thing Groce doesn't get credit for is getting in very late in game on Kendrick Nunn. Webber had 0 shot at landing Nunn. Groce was able to get Nunn and establish something of a Simeon pipeline... The biggest indictment on Groce is his inability to land a PG. He mis-evaluated Ulis. It happens. Self misevaluated Andre Iguodala. No one is infallible. And then the Quentin Snider 11th hour de-commit compounded the mistake on Ulis. Finally, I think people undersell the rebuild Groce had to do. With an empty '10 class (none of those guys were around for Groce's first year), a largely empty '11 class (4 of the 6 transferred after Groce's first year and Henry was the only one who could play), and the '12 class was empty. Groce did well with the remains of the '09 class in year 1. Did well to almost make the tournament with a completely revamped roster in Year 2, and had bad luck in Year 3 (Cosby not working out, the Rice injury, the Abrams injury, the obvious chemistry issues when Rice returned). Year 4 is setting up as another down year because of injuries. I'm optimistic about the '17 class. Particularly because a lot of the talent is south of I-80. If Groce doesn't land a strong class there, it's time to worry about whether he can stick at Illinois.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Oct 28, 2015 -> 09:56 AM) I was just in Denver and the people I was talking to their absolutely deplore the law. Then again it was a conference for bankers and finance people so might have just been you had a > percentage of conservatives their given the nature of the profession. That said, the bulk of these people indicated they had originally voted for the law. I had been in downtown denver numerous times and their were a lot more vagrants and homeless this time (going purely off of my eye test). I live in Denver (and, as a disclaimer, spend my time at microbreweries, not dispensaries). Yeah, the 16th Street Mall in downtown has vagrants, but it's always had vagrants. And the commercial real estate market in Denver is absolutely being driven by the marijuana industry (per a recent report, 1 in 11 commercial buildings in Denver are used for marijuana). The bankers have issues with it because banks have to deal with the conflict between federal and state law (lending where the collateral is being used in contravention of federal law - there are actually a lot of interesting legal cases dealing with the conflict between state and federal law). It's a positive from a state revenue standpoint. It's a positive for jobs and the real estate market. Changing the law now would shutter lots businesses, leave tons of commercial properties empty, shut down a reliable source of state revenue - revenue that funds education keeping that burden away from property taxes - and would have a horrible economic impact on the state...

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 28, 2015 -> 09:12 AM) Rubio. And my money is on him to win the nomination. Christie is moderate (compared to that field) policy-wise, but he's got behavioral issues that make him come off as a little nuts at time. Not that Christie has much of a chance at the nomination, but his position on marijuana (feds start enforcing federal law) would almost certainly swing Colorado to the Democrat nominee...

QUOTE (greg775 @ Oct 26, 2015 -> 09:14 PM) So if the position is a do-nothing position, I think we should just give it to Carson. He's very intelligent. He's soft spoken and let him represent the USA. You know, personality does matter. There have been enough red-flags on Hillary's temper and rudeness to make Americans fear her being "in charge" of the nation. Greg's quick hits ... • Hillary: Too rude, too mean, too obnoxious to be allowed to be President for 8 years. Please America wise up. Plus her winning would precede 8 more years of Chelsea and do we want that?? • Trump: Too cocky, too intolerant of anybody but himself, too boastful to represent the USA for 4 years (he'd lose re-election). • Bernie: Too nutty with this socialism stuff to be given the office for 8 years. • Bush: Too incompetent in terms of garnering absolutely any support. • Carson: Smart, classy, calm, brilliant, yet not a politico. He'll hire good people in all the key positions and re-energize the country's faith in politics. Give him the office, baby! 8 years. • Florina: Too incompetent in terms of her past jobs. Has a bit of a mean edge like Hillary and is too much of a self-made corporate 'tool' if that's the word. She knows how to impress a room full of HR people. Can't let her rule the roost for 4 years (she'd lose re-election). I would encourage those of you who like politics and have been silent in defending my rants against Hillary or even trying to re-but them to give me your quick hits on the leading candidates. I'm open to changing my mind on Hilly, I really am. I just have a gut feeling from everything I've read and heard coming out of her mouth she is truly a disaster waiting to happen. Gregg, please see below regarding Carson. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2015/10/...ness-continues/ As to Hillary Clinton, of all the candidates who are likely to win the nomination, she is the most likely to work across the aisle without massive shocks to political institutions. Any Conservative that wins will be expected to work with the guys who keep trying to shut down the government. Sanders is too far to the left to get any of his policies through. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, will be pushed to the left in the primaries by Sanders, but has the best chance amongst all the candidates of being able to work across the aisle and get things done. Furthermore, of that group above, Clinton has the most experience - both as a Senator and as Secretary of State. There are plenty of reasons to avoid Hillary Clinton as President. I'm not particularly excited about a Clinton presidency (Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama-Clinton is a bad trend) but she is the best of the options at the moment (in my opinion). Her being mean and her ushering in a Chelsea Clinton presidency (seriously Greg?) have nothing to do with policy...

We've been in our current house for almost two years. Right now, we're re-doing the landscaping entirely. Basically, we bought from a lady who LOVED gardening and the wife and I would rather be in the mountains or drinking good beer than working in the yard. Landscaper has done great work - the outdoor seating area looks good. Everything is going according to plan. But they are the WORST at communicating. Not telling us what days they are going to be working, the timeline, etc. It's just so very, very frustrating... As to re-doing stuff in the house. We left the Midwest unexpectedly a few years back - right after putting a new furnace and AC into the house. Because we didn't know we would be leaving within the year, we spent more than we would have otherwise. According to feedback from our realtor, it helped our house sell quicker than it might have otherwise - but we didn't get (or expect) more money from the sale...

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 26, 2015 -> 03:43 PM) I'm not talking in absolutes. I'm saying there's no proof that people with guns will suddenly become moron vigilantes, and that anyone who shoots should be held to the same standard as anyone else - is your shooting justified or not. You should be open to criminal prosecution of the situation warrants it. But there are plenty of examples of people acting like morons with their firearms. There are also examples of people acting heroically with firearms. As someone who did not grow up around guns, doesn't hunt, and doesn't have a farm with crops to protect, wouldn't trust myself with a firearm (and without training, shouldn't be trusted with a firearm). The morons with guns are a bigger risk to me in public (particularly in states that allow anyone to carry anywhere) than the heroes who might put a stop to a bad situation.