Jump to content

T-dog

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    261
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by T-dog

  1. 1 hour ago, Napoleon said:

    When my grandfather was about 98 or barely 99, he told my brother (with a bit of pride in his voice)- 

    "You know, sometimes I still get excited."

    Perhaps that's what he's talking about.

    Guess we are back to grown man boner talk

  2. 4 hours ago, Machinator said:

    https://athlonsports.com/college-football/early-college-football-top-25-2018

    Athlon's rankings of where they expect teams to end up by January 2019 (Big 12 teams in bold):

    1. Alabama
    2. Clemson
    3. Georgia
    4. Ohio State
    5. Michigan
    6. Miami
    7. Auburn
    8. Washington
    9. Wisconsin
    10. Oklahoma
    11. Penn State
    12. Michigan State
    13. Florida State
    14. Mississippi State
    15. Notre Dame
    16. Virginia Tech
    17. Florida
    18. Stanford
    19. Boise State
    20. Texas
    21. USC
    22. West Virginia
    23. Oregon
    24. TCU
    25. Texas A&M

    So BlowU and UT in the Big 12 Championship Game, I'd be down for that.

     

  3. 1 hour ago, Fud said:

    No USC is interesting. He's cousins with Tua and his brother, fwiw 

     

    Pretty interesting, since CBs were favoring USC so far and his last UOV was to LA last week. Does that mean those are the 5 OVs he's going to take? He's a beast, so I don't want to get my hopes up, but getting him would not suck.

  4. 24 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

    Lastly, some say, "well, there's nothing going on. What else should we talk about?"

    That's the point. SHUT THE FUCK UP FOR A FEW HOURS.

    The fish aren't biting today, why don't we pour garbage in the stream until they are biting. The other fisherman won't mind wading through it and it's fun!

    We should all abstain from posting until we're fairly sure we're adding information, entertainment or a somewhat fresh take. Goofy is generally acceptable. Sententious is not. We'll all fall short of this standard from time to time, but we should at least try to make one thread in the sports boards informative and fun.

     

    Blatant disregard for mission 1k

  5. 10 hours ago, bernorange said:

    I'll repeat from previous discussions measures that I think would have a meaningful impact:

    • Re-evaluate age of adulthood.  Teenagers are not a homogenous group.  Some mature faster than others.  We have tidal cultural forces that promote certain ideas as rights of passage in this country and most of them speak to very immature decision making IMO.  There is a significant enough percentage of teenagers that have not reached the maturity threshold of adulthood by 18 that an examination of the age of adulthood is warranted.  Specifically, I am talking about the age where adults can legally enter contracts, purchase guns, purchase regulated drugs (alcohol, tobacco, etc.), etc.  I favor moving the age of adulthood to 19 or 20 - when the average person will have graduated from high school.  Or perhaps, make it conditional - 21 or 18 + high school graduate / GED.
    • Strengthen penalties for adults who provide access to minors for restricted/regulated items when they commit a crime.  I mean both guns and drugs.  Adults (whether parents or not) who provide access to guns or drugs (alcohol, etc.) to minors should be charged as accessories for any crimes said minors commit with (or while under the influence of) the restricted items. 
    • Improve "gun violence restraining orders"/"red flag" laws.  I have read about several variations of this idea.  I support the ones with due process where the public can petition a judge to issue an order for immediate action and there is a course for due process to take place and sort out the details.  I am not in favor of the more Draconian versions that provide for LEOs to confiscate firearms on the spot and on their whim.  That's anathema.

    Aside from the above, I'm pondering whether it might not be a worthwhile investment of student academic focus to require some course(s) in peer development.  Sort of a mish mash of sociology and civics that talks about the issues of individual behavior/choices, peer groups, bullying, social media, etc.  I haven't fully developed this idea.  I think it might be constructive to have kids spend some time thinking about how they engage (or avoid engaging) with their peers.

    Interesting measures, but I sharply disagree with #1 in terms of raising the general age of adulthood because we have to put this into a larger perspective. I would be fine though with raising the age to purchase guns, heck you should be able to buy a beer before you can buy a gun IMO (although I'd argue that the alcohol limit is too high leading to several problems, but that is a discussion for another thread).

  6. 8 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

    Many posters keep talking about the underlying problem. Taking away guns won't solve it. 

    Will you please identify the underlying problem? In your opinon 

     

    7 hours ago, Mole said:

    Something has changed culturally with the way Millennials were raised. Our culture is doing something to alienate kids in a different way and/or not doing something to build up needed resilience. I think it's lots of little problems adding up: 24/7 bullying, the angst of seeing the perfect social media life of others, no physical outlet for the frustration, the way we raise boys, the near requirement of dual income homes, helicopter parenting, glorification of violence, insane gun culture, the noisiness of modern life, celebrity culture, high-pressure testing throughout schooling, etc.

    Pretty much this, plus we have a couple of catalysts for those trends, most importantly social media. Plus past attacks that act as a model

  7. 9 hours ago, MoJames said:

    I think it is odd that those in this thread pointing to problems outside of guns, generally don't want any changes to gun laws.

    But those who work in the medical field and agree that the behavioral health system is broke in this country, have no issues with changes in the behavioral health system.

    I feel like you in part are talking to me, but in my inaugural post in this thread is said that gun control has to be one of the things that needs to be addressed. I'm simply advocating that this won't be enough. 

    9 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    Let’s say a kid instead steals his parents vehicle to murder dozens of people, should the parents be held responsible? 

    I don’t disagree with your suggestion, I’m just trying to look at from other angles.

    It is done in some other countries, for example I know of a case in Germany where the father of a school shooter had to pay close to $1m in damages because he failed to lock up his weapons properly. I think something should be done here, because if you want to possess a weapon of deadly force, you should be able to demonstrate some basic responsibilities

  8. 3 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

    Your example doesn’t have anything to do with schools. Yes, there are knife attacks in other countries. There are cars mowing into crowds. We have both of those here too. Explosives? Yep, we have those too. 

    Yes, if we get rid of the guns, some people will still be able to attack people with a car or a knife or a bomb. That is true. But we wouldn’t have school shootings every week. Isn’t that the point? Isn’t that the goal? 

    Your point, but please correct me if I’m wrong, is that there is a cultural problem and we need to fix that too. Possibly, but how do you fix inequality? 

    Some People have “stuff” that other people want. Which leads to jealousy, rage, depression, etc. Stuff can be anything from popularity to physical possessions, but most of the time it is a female’s affection. This “problem” has existed since the beginning of time. I’m sure we can start a anti-jealousy campaign, and unlike the drug war, it might actually make some difference. 

     

    No my premier point is that while taking guns away will decrease or even eliminate school shootings, it does not solve the underlying problems we have which make school shootings occur. Instead, other outlets will be found. But if your goal is to eliminate school shootings, sure go ahead and seize every gun and there will only be a limited number of them, but potentially some other kind of attack because you have only cured one symptom but not the disease.

    If you read my earlier post I laid out 3 steps which I believe are the most effective means to tackle these issues, one of them is gun control, but proclaiming gun control as the single measure to cure our society is to short-sighted. My point is not necessarily that is a cultural problem, but that a complex problem needs complex solutions. 

    I'm not quite sure how to interpret your inequality comment though. 

  9. 4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

    I'm no fan of the ideas of arming teachers and locking down schools, but if we're truly going to insist that all ideas are on the table . . . then all ideas have to be on the table.  I can't in good conscience rant about restricting magazine capacity, tightening private gun sale regulations, etc. without allowing for other potential solutions.

    In the end I think the optimum solution will probably be a combination of small, incremental effects on multiple fronts.

    Small, incremental effects on multiple fronts will be the only solution to a problem. No simple singular option to cure it all is available. 

    But you also have to weigh the side effects of every measure. I personally feel that 'locking up the schools' by ever-tightened security would create a bunch of other problems for kids

  10. 1 minute ago, Neonmoon said:

    Hence why I said school. 

    Just trying to protect kids at school first. Then we can worry about public crowds. 

    As I said, right now you take guns because they are the most convenient solution. If you wouldn't have guns, you'd take something else. Hence the example from a country where guns are more regulated than in the US

  11. 14 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

    Name the last time someone killed 10 kids at school with a Car, Knife or PVC pipe. 

    I will wait...

    Not a school, but you might want to read up on Nice, France

  12. 2 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

    People who think “fixing” the mental health system will stop people from shooting up schools don’t know shit about mental health, citizens rights in regards to mental health, or the system in general. 

    The mental health system does need fixing. That’s a fact. There are seriously ill people who will never be able to function in society. Psych Hospitals need to be brought back. 

    There is still a stigma around mental health, and to be honest, there might always be, but the majority of the population has a mental health issues or knows someone who does. 

    Also, you can’t throw someone away and lock the key. Today an emergency hold, most are only 72 hours (TX is 48), only will happen when you can prove someone is a danger to themselves or others and they require a court order.  And not just any person can initiate this process, most states require a police officer, or physician, or psychologist. 

    Most of these angry teen school shooters. How do you lock them up? Let’s say you see them post a disturbing post? Do you send them to therapy? Okay, fine. That doesn’t take them off the streets. Also, many people who go to therapy don’t get better. Many don’t take their meds. Some can still function in society though. And one day they snap. What know. 

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for getting more people more mental health care but it won’t stop school shootings and anyone who is saying this is trying to get the focus away from guns 

    I'm not talking about locking people away per se. I'm talking about giving troubled kids another outlet to tackle their issues before they erupt. 

    The problem about this whole debate is that it is way too emotional. As soon as somebody talks about gun control people are going to scream "dont take away muh guns"/ "guns don't kill people, people do", as soon as somebody is talking about anything else people are going to scream that it's a gun issue. But the thing is, mass shootings are only a symptom of a disease that is brewing under the skin of our society. Mass shootings aren't there only because there are too many guns, and mass shootings aren't there only because there are too many teens that have some problems. Most of those shooters don't have some "hard" mental illness like schizophrenia, but rather have experienced stuff that has brought them to the point where they want to take revenge and end their own lives.

    The thing is, gun control will only get you so far; yes, gun control will be able to limit the number of school shootings and likely the number of deaths, but it does not solve the real problem. Potentially other weapons will be used, for example in Europe there were a lot of Islamic terror attack with cars/trucks since weapons are more strictly regulated. Also you can access ingredients for some explosives legally. Gun control will limit mass shootings, but it does not solve the real problem that we have that a share of our population is feeling so left out that they are willing to turn on society. This, you can only fix by taking care of people, and fighting mental illness is one way to do it as a society as a whole. 

    So sure, if you want the shootings to end, take away the guns. But don't be surprised if the next thing we are going to talk about is school bombings or school car attacks

    • Like 1
  13. 4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

    This is how mass shootings are curtailed. A strong mental health safety net. We have gutted ours. The costs for housing mentally disturbed people would bankrupt states, families.

    As the cure/band aid for many of the mental diseases out there is usually drugs, it can never be cured (for the most part).

     

    The cure is not always drugs. Gotta fix the roots of the underlying problem instead of drugging kids for the rest of their lives.

×
×
  • Create New...