Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Sunday, December 02, 2012

OTP December 2012 - Pushing G.O.P. to Negotiate, Obama Ends Giving In

Mr. Obama, scarred by failed negotiations in his first term and emboldened by a clear if close election to a second, has emerged as a different kind of negotiator in the past week or two, sticking to the liberal line and frustrating Republicans on the other side of the bargaining table.

Bitter Mouse Posted: December 02, 2012 at 11:15 PM | 6172 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 38 of 62 pages ‹ First  < 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 >  Last ›
   3701. Ron J2 Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:26 PM (#4328028)
"Anyone who does something I don't like is a coward"


Funny, I was reading 1776 last night and it starts with some Brit asserting that the colonists were all traitorous cowards who would disperse the first time they were met with force. (Followed by a quote from a Major General who asserted he could calm the colonies with just 5,000 men)
   3702. spike Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:27 PM (#4328030)
How is a pump action shotgun an assault rifle?

I certainly grant the technical aspect of your question, but the Remington 870 has been in mlilitary use for some time, and shotguns in general make for pretty terrifying anti-personnel weapons. They are extremely useful in assaulting something, and properly kitted out, low profile, lightweight, and exceptionally tactically effective.
   3703. The Good Face Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:30 PM (#4328034)
school shootings are not actually a meaningful danger at all.


And yet, they keep happening.


People keep getting struck by lightning or stung to death by bees too. Doesn't mean we should panic and be irrational about the risks presented. School shootings are terrifying, but so is the prospect of being mauled by a chimpanzee, or tortured to death by a serial killer. Lots of stuff is scary; people need to maintain some perspective.
   3704. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:30 PM (#4328036)
It was 1997. Woodham was constrained to a single shot deer rifle that had to be reloaded manually. While the principal's actions likely saved lives at the secondary target (the junior high) the assault weapons ban that was in effect from 1994-2004 almost certainly saved lives too. If Woodham had had access to a large clip semi-automatic, more than 9 people would have been shot that day.


He had a bolt-action 30-30. I highly doubt it was single-shot. Yes, you have to work the bolt to chamber another round, but 30-30's do have clips that can be changed out pretty quickly. And if I am going to be shot, I would MUCH rather be shot by a .223 than a .30-.30. An assault rifle is more dangerous because of the rapid rate of fire, but don't knock a deer rifle thinking it's one bullet, stop, one bullet, stop, etc.
   3705. spike Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:31 PM (#4328037)
Or *anything* chambered for .22LR ...

the whole point behind the assault weapon concept when designed in WWII was to use lower powered ammo. Almost all infantry combat takes place <400 yards. Low power ammo is lighter, cheaper, and more more damage inflicting. Nato uses a 5.62mm round as standard - it's analogous to a .223.
   3706. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:33 PM (#4328040)
5.62mm round as standard - it's analogous to a .223.


That's 5.56*

And it's not remotely similar to .22LR.

* You're probably thinking 7.62 Nato, which is analogous to .308
   3707. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:34 PM (#4328041)
I certainly grant the technical aspect of your question, but the Remington 870 has been in mlilitary use for some time, and shotguns in general make for pretty terrifying anti-personnel weapons. They are extremely useful in assaulting something, and properly kitted out, low profile, lightweight, and exceptionally tactically effective.


Oh, fully understood - I am just wondering how that shotgun is any more dangerous than something that would be used for duck or turkey hunting? Lighter materials and a better recoil system maybe?
   3708. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:36 PM (#4328044)
No government program works or will ever work ... except the one in which all government schools are armed with assault weapons.

So say America's right wing loons.

   3709. Gotham Dave Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:36 PM (#4328045)
Never been in the situation so I can't say for sure how I would react
You probably should've just stopped here.

I mean terrible as in horrific, and also as in unreliable. You're not always going to have people willing to do that. For every Arizona gang rush you'd have a group of helpless people waiting for the ###### to run out of ammo. If we can't think of something better than that we should probably just quit having a country and revert to barbarism. (I know the libertarians would like that)
   3710. Lassus Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:39 PM (#4328047)
Lots of stuff is scary; people need to maintain some perspective.

What would you consider a more appropriate level of concern?
   3711. spike Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:42 PM (#4328050)
That's 5.56*

And it's not remotely similar to .22LR.

* You're probably thinking 7.62 Nato, which is analogous to .308


Of course correct on all counts - typing too fast.

Yes, the 5.56 has greater stopping power and more powder - my point was that low power ammo is not a refutation of the concept, that a lightweight, concealable high rate of fire semi auto with an expanded magazine capability certainly qualifies to me as far more tactically useful than anything else, and meets the spirit of the assault rifle definition.

   3712. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:42 PM (#4328051)
   3713. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:44 PM (#4328053)
Doesn't mean we should panic and be irrational about the risks presented.

What makes you think anyone is? There's no "panic" and no "irrationality."(*)

You're the one being irrational, by giving too much credit to the "right" that's being weighed against the risk. The "right" is worth a very small amount of risk, as the massacre of six-year-olds in the context in which it occurred makes abundantly clear. The atrocity didn't create a new calculus of risk/reward in people's minds; it pointed out how absurd the existing one was.

(*) Beyond the tautological, "You're thinking of this differently than I am."
   3714. spike Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:46 PM (#4328055)
@3712, concede again, explanation in 3711
   3715. The Good Face Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:49 PM (#4328058)
Lots of stuff is scary; people need to maintain some perspective.

What would you consider a more appropriate level of concern?


We should use reason and science to determine how big of a threat school shootings really are and proceed from there. Right now, the nation is stuck in a glass cage of emotion; that's perfectly natural, but its not the time to be making policy decisions.

I mean terrible as in horrific, and also as in unreliable. You're not always going to have people willing to do that. For every Arizona gang rush you'd have a group of helpless people waiting for the ###### to run out of ammo. If we can't think of something better than that we should probably just quit having a country and revert to barbarism. (I know the libertarians would like that)


Barbarism is able bodied people hiding under desks hoping the killer shoots somebody else instead.
   3716. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:52 PM (#4328060)
Lots of stuff is scary; people need to maintain some perspective.


I think this is true. In actuality individual events that kill people are always going to happen. Weather (for example) happens, and right now there is not much we can do to change the weather (crazy Chinese Olympic plans notwithstanding), but we can have weather alerts, use technology, building codes, insurance schemes, and so on to minimize the impact of weather.

As a society we do this all the time, and have throughout history. Progress is made and the world is safer than it was 100 years ago by a silly amount. What I (and some others are arguing) is we can work against gun violence, we can do things, but we need to use evidence and having a huge block of people screaming Second Amendment and "More Guns!" is not very helpful.

There are already some gun limits. We can adjust them, use technology and modern health care (including on the mental illness side) and come up with solutions that reduce (not eliminates, but reduces) gun violence over time without making us slaves to the fascist state (or whatever it is people think is going to happen if they can't have a automatic gun with a 100 round clip under their pillow each night).
   3717. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:53 PM (#4328061)
We should use reason and science to determine how big of a threat school shootings really are and proceed from there.

That might be a worthy project, but there's little doubt that it's a big enough threat to outweigh a person's "right" to possess numerous semiautomatic weapons and fast clips, which is really the issue at hand.

The killer's mother had no right to possess that level of weaponry, and, in context, doing so posed a reckless danger to the nearby school. Her conduct was highly, highly reckless.

No one is suggesting that the typical pistol or hunting shotgun be outlawed. Had the killer taken one of these, he would have killed far fewer children.
   3718. Srul Itza Posted: December 18, 2012 at 06:58 PM (#4328063)
People keep getting struck by lightning or stung to death by bees too. Doesn't mean we should panic and be irrational about the risks presented.


Doesn't mean we should trash all the lightning rods because, hey, what could go wrong.
   3719. DJS and the Infinite Sadness Posted: December 18, 2012 at 07:08 PM (#4328066)
The NRA broke its silence today.


National Rifle Association of America is made up of four million moms and dads, sons and daughters –
and we were shocked, saddened and heartbroken by the news of the horrific and senseless murders in Newtown.

Out of respect for the families, and as a matter of common decency, we have given time for mourning, prayer and a full investigation of the facts before commenting.

The NRA is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again.

The NRA is planning to hold a major news conference in the Washington, DC area on Friday, December 21.


Cue the outrage change from the NRA not saying something to the NRA saying something.
   3720. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: December 18, 2012 at 07:11 PM (#4328070)
The NRA is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again.

The NRA is planning to hold a major news conference in the Washington, DC area on Friday, December 21.


Cue the stupid.
   3721. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: December 18, 2012 at 07:18 PM (#4328073)
Cue the outrage change from the NRA not saying something to the NRA saying something.


I see they hired a different publicist than usual to craft that one.

   3722. Greg K Posted: December 18, 2012 at 07:19 PM (#4328075)
Huh? Do you have a better plan? Is it the plan for dealing with grizzlies in Alaska - go out into grizzly country with someone you can outrun?

I found jumping into the car and leaving my girlfriend to fend for herself the best (and noblest) strategy the first time I was confronted with a bear.
   3723. Ron J2 Posted: December 18, 2012 at 07:24 PM (#4328078)
#3722 My sister lives in bear country. She'd probably react better than I would (even if I can easily out-run her)
   3724. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: December 18, 2012 at 07:26 PM (#4328079)
Gang-rushing the attacker is a proven method of stopping them prior to police arrival. Worked in Arizona when Gifford was shot.
Of course it works, but it's hard to think of a more terrible Plan A.


Essentially "gang-rushing," was a standard infantry tactic for oh, most of human history, it ceased being effective awhile back, and became insanely suicidally ineffective with the advent of machine guns...

   3725. Ron J2 Posted: December 18, 2012 at 07:26 PM (#4328080)
#3719 I think the NRA is usually tone deaf but this time they've been pretty damned smart. This is a time to play the long game and they have.
   3726. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: December 18, 2012 at 07:29 PM (#4328084)
I've been reading political/current event/opinion stuff for a bit over 30 years, of all ideological stripes, and I don't know that I've ever heard any serious person ever suggest anything as ridiculous as Megan McArdle's suggestion to eschew gun control in favor of the second-grader bum rush.

   3727. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: December 18, 2012 at 07:32 PM (#4328086)
Milton Friedman's Grandson to build floating Libertarian city

Speaking of libertarianism, I heard something about this on NPR last night and was wondering how this well this was going to work. According to what I heard they have plans to have a city up by 2014 and was reminded me of the video game Bioshock. Hoping this means we will be seeing some "Big Daddy's" soon.
   3728. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: December 18, 2012 at 07:41 PM (#4328088)
Essentially "gang-rushing," was a standard infantry tactic for oh, most of human history, it ceased being effective awhile back, and became insanely suicidally ineffective with the advent of machine guns...


The Austrians found this out when they fought the Prussians in 1866 when the Prussians had the "needle" gun.
   3729. Greg K Posted: December 18, 2012 at 07:51 PM (#4328090)
The Austrians found this out when they fought the Prussians in 1866 when the Prussians had the "needle" gun.

To be fair, the Austrians had them too, they just got some bad advice from Jon Snow.
   3730. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: December 18, 2012 at 07:51 PM (#4328091)
The NRA is prepared to offer meaningful contributions to help make sure this never happens again.
Free guns for teachers, then.

That should make teachers' union negotiations trickier.
   3731. DJS and the Infinite Sadness Posted: December 18, 2012 at 08:04 PM (#4328098)
Cue the stupid.

Thank goodness you're conducting. Wouldn't want someone who didn't read the score.
   3732. Steve Treder Posted: December 18, 2012 at 08:12 PM (#4328099)
I've been reading political/current event/opinion stuff for a bit over 30 years, of all ideological stripes, and I don't know that I've ever heard any serious person ever suggest anything as ridiculous as Megan McArdle's suggestion to eschew gun control in favor of the second-grader bum rush.

One of the comments on the Media Matters site's link to McArdle's piece put it best: "You first."
   3733. McCoy Posted: December 18, 2012 at 08:12 PM (#4328100)
Essentially "gang-rushing," was a standard infantry tactic for oh, most of human history, it ceased being effective awhile back, and became insanely suicidally ineffective with the advent of machine guns...

I'd say the Romans or perhaps even the Greeks 2,000 or more years ago made "gang-rushing" foolish and ineffective. For about the last 2500 years now we've had plenty of examples of where "gang-rushing" an organized and trained body of soldiers is basically suicide or at the very least very costly.
   3734. McCoy Posted: December 18, 2012 at 08:24 PM (#4328106)
Tonight at 10:00pm on the Discovery Channel is the Zombie Apocalypse. That is all
   3735. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: December 18, 2012 at 08:25 PM (#4328108)

Milton Friedman's Grandson to build floating Libertarian city



Link doesn't work. But I googled for some stories. This is my favorite quote:

What could go wrong?
Let's see, says John Cole in Balloon Juice. Floating cities, constructed under super-loose building standards, in the middle of the ocean? The rest of us will pay a fortune in rescue costs. And these isolated communities will be "populated by people desperate enough to work for less than minimum wage with easy access to weapons of all sorts," says Allahpundit in Hot Air. This could be "the start of a magical utopia where government is small, freedom is plentiful, and the only limit to the pursuit of happiness is your ability to swim.
   3736. DJS and the Infinite Sadness Posted: December 18, 2012 at 08:25 PM (#4328109)
they just got some bad advice from Jon Snow.


Stick them with the pointy end sounds like good advice to me.
   3737. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: December 18, 2012 at 08:34 PM (#4328110)
For about the last 2500 years now we've had plenty of examples of where "gang-rushing" an organized and trained body of soldiers is basically suicide or at the very least very costly.


Costly, yes, ineffective sometimes, effective sometimes

1914-1918- ludicrously suicidal

It actually kind of worked for the Red Army in WWII urban warfare- the key was close range and submachine guns- have 30 guys bum rush a machine gun nest, or a building- and sure you'd take casualties, but some guys would get in range to make effective use of their PPShs. It didn't really work if you had too much ground to cover before you got in reasonable range to use your submachine guns though- 30 men charging an MG34 or MG42 could be 30 dead men pretty quickly.
   3738. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 18, 2012 at 08:36 PM (#4328111)
We should use reason and science to determine how big of a threat school shootings really are and proceed from there.


1) We should use science and reason. Thanks for clarifying that. It'd be terrible if you were just throwing those terms around emotionally and without any rational use case behind them. It's almost as if you just want to delay thinking about the issue until public opinion recalcifies to your preferred status quo ante.

2) People treat mass shootings differently than lightening strikes because mass shootings aren't random acts of nature. Good lord. How obvious is that?

Other bits:

1) The shotgun was included in the graphic because it was one of the weapons used in Aurora.

2) That's a reasonable statement from the NRA. I expect they'll #### it up eventually, but at this point, not too bad.

3) Megan McArdle is apparently exactly as stupid as her reputation.
   3739. GregD Posted: December 18, 2012 at 08:43 PM (#4328113)
McArdle can be interesting at times. She knows nothing about economics and acts like she knows everything about it, but that's not unusual. She's so committed to the counterintuitive that she cannot escape from it or tell the difference between lucidity and absolute stupidity. She can only tell that she's not being what she's expected to be (a shtick she's repeated so often that she's become totally predictable.)

I would not be totally shocked if the NRA proposed some mild reform. It would be smart of them to agree to some upper-limit for high-capacity magazines to head off anything stronger. Figuring out the least-costly reform is generally smart business, though the NRA has been able to follow a different strategy the last 10 years.
   3740. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 18, 2012 at 08:45 PM (#4328115)
I would not be totally shocked if the NRA proposed some mild reform. It would be smart of them to agree to some upper-limit for high-capacity magazines to head off anything stronger. Figuring out the least-costly reform is generally smart business, though the NRA has been able to follow a different strategy the last 10 years.


I agree. From the silent period, the lack of any push-back against the solidifying "this one changes things" narrative, to the low key press release above, it wouldn't shock me if they came out looking to recoup the potential big hit by taking a small hit up front.
   3741. Jay Z Posted: December 18, 2012 at 09:10 PM (#4328126)
Screw remaining calm about Newtown. I know the ones desiring calm have an agenda, but emotion is always the motive behind action. Reason and logic are only tools that get you where you want to go. They should be put to use, but only with your end goal in mind.

I'm sure people involved in MAAD, abolitionists, etc. all had their source of anger, often from direct experience. Who can blame them from working towards their goals.

I think Newtown is far more disgusting to the average person from afar than Columbine. Columbine at least made some sort of twisted sense. An adult gunning down six year olds, with twice the casualties, is just evil, with the parent abetting the perp besides.

I have no illusions about the fetishizing of guns in this country, or the power of the NRA. But there have been many movements to make things better in our world. There have been many forces, like the NRA, that seemingly sit triumphant atop sectors of society. And it always changes. I do not expect it will be an easy or quick change, but the attempt needs to be made.
   3742. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: December 18, 2012 at 09:11 PM (#4328128)
sam

i am surprised at you.

wayne isn't going to concede anything. he considers the president illegitimate and hence the administration without standing

   3743. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: December 18, 2012 at 09:28 PM (#4328142)
The emotional trauma caused by the atrocity is a proper factor in any bloodless, rational consideration of risk, right, and reward. TGF and the NRA want to wait for it to pass in the hope that it will be undercounted in the calculus.
   3744. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 18, 2012 at 09:29 PM (#4328143)
Wayne?

EDIT: Ah. LaPierre. I wasn't aware of the fact that he was a birther, Harv.
   3745. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: December 18, 2012 at 09:46 PM (#4328147)
sam

i think wayne is now convinced that the president's middle name is corrupt because he uses that word every time he discusses the president
   3746. Tripon Posted: December 18, 2012 at 09:57 PM (#4328153)

Speaking of libertarianism, I heard something about this on NPR last night and was wondering how this well this was going to work. According to what I heard they have plans to have a city up by 2014 and was reminded me of the video game Bioshock. Hoping this means we will be seeing some "Big Daddy's" soon.


Bioshock Infinite (the new Bioshock game) is set in the floating city of Columbia. But instead of a Randian paradise, the city's running model is american exceptional-ism. Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.
   3747. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 18, 2012 at 10:02 PM (#4328155)
That's interesting, Harv. I'd always assumed that the rank mouth-breathing stupidity of that sort was reserved for the rank and file, not the officer corps.
   3748. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 18, 2012 at 10:06 PM (#4328158)
RE: the Floating Isles of Libertopia, I think this is the most fantastic idea ever. It will either 1) prove the case for more libertarian policy making in the world at large, or 2) prove how stupid Libetarian idealism is when faced with the real world.

I admit, the idea of some vague thousands of Galtian supermen begging the socialist states of the world for help as they slowly drown in shark infested waters is also amusing to me as well.
   3749. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: December 18, 2012 at 10:07 PM (#4328160)
sam

wayne whips up a fervor. i think he's feeling his oats given the nra's winning streak
   3750. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: December 18, 2012 at 10:11 PM (#4328163)
What I want to know is how will they resupply there floating city? where will the food come from, after a time the money? what can they produce that will help there floating nation acquire wealth? who will they trade with? What form of currency? also who is going to stop pirates from decided #### taking boats we can get a city? so many things that can go wrong, should be fun to watch
   3751. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 18, 2012 at 10:18 PM (#4328167)
Meat, I take back all the mean things I've said about you in the football thread. The idea of Somali pirates attacking Libertopia is worth all of your god-awful Notre Dame fandom, son.
   3752. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: December 18, 2012 at 10:25 PM (#4328169)
but in reality it makes sense that if these floating nations start to pop up this would be a very real concern, not just the Somali's but hell the drug cartels in Mexico and SA.
   3753. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 18, 2012 at 10:28 PM (#4328172)
On the serious side, yes, market states are the next iteration of the human tribe. Hell, the United States is probably best considered a notional evolutionary middle ground between nation-states and market-states. But the idea that a floating island is going to be a competitive market state with no real economy...

I guess Pirate Bay and Anonymous will all need homes eventually.
   3754. greenback calls it soccer Posted: December 18, 2012 at 10:36 PM (#4328174)
also who is going to stop pirates from decided #### taking boats we can get a city?

Everybody will have a gun on the Galtopolis, and maybe some sarin gas too. Pirates are less of a risk than some charismatic fellow on the boat turning into Oliver Cromwell.
   3755. spike Posted: December 18, 2012 at 10:46 PM (#4328178)
Personally, I hope it's just successful enough that they all go to one.
   3756. zenbitz Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:03 PM (#4328188)
They don't just Macgyver them out of things from Dollar Tree.


Hmmm... do they sell fertilizer at Dollar Tree?
   3757. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:07 PM (#4328193)
2) People treat mass shootings differently than lightening strikes because mass shootings aren't random acts of nature. Good lord. How obvious is that?


So nonobvious that it's wrong. Evil is about as natural a phenomenon as there is. And if we can't recognize it in advance, it can't be stopped. And we can't recognize it in advance with these types of school shootings. The kid was "strange." Quiet, reserved, unable to adjust or fit in to normal society. Cue scores of kids across the world.

And school shootings are relatively rare. But when they happen, they are horrific and shocking on a large scale. They cue obviously natural feelings of outrage. That doesn't mean an intelligent person reacts to it with a small mind, by thinking that tweaking gun control laws will amount to a hill of beans difference.

   3758. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:14 PM (#4328201)
As to the NRA, I do not own any guns nor do I ever plan to. I grew up in a part of the country - Massachusetts - where most people just didn't have them. I find the gun culture silly, but in the same way that I find organized religion silly, or NASCAR. It won't change my life any if stricter gun control laws were put into place. It does cut into freedom in the same way that Obamacare does, but whatever.

All of that said, the NRA is in a lose-lose position. No matter what they say or do, people will demonize them, if not outright blame them. The NRA is Mark McGwire testifying in front of Congress in 2005, with people demanding to know why he killed Taylor Hooton. The lynch mob is out in full force, because every crisis provides an opportunity; here, the senseless evil visited on dozens of victims is being shamelessly used as a vehicle to further the left wing agenda.
   3759. Lassus Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:21 PM (#4328206)
If the NRA supports a measure of extended-clip control and some other reasonable measure or two already mentioned here that, they are not going to be lynched.
   3760. spike Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:24 PM (#4328208)
Hmmm... do they sell fertilizer at Dollar Tree?

The Calcium Nitrate used in Afghani IEDs comes from a foreign country (Pakistan). It requires pretty significant amounts to construct a meaningful IED. Assuming that the domestic tyranny would be clever enough to limit access to massive quantities of native chemicals, it's going to be pretty tough for the Wolverines to go that route. As Harv noted upthread, it's extremely tightly controlled in this country.
   3761. spike Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:26 PM (#4328210)
If the NRA supports a measure of extended-clip control and some other reasonable measure or two already mentioned here that, they are not going to be lynched.

The Tea Partiers will certainly suggest the idea.
   3762. Dale Sams Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:28 PM (#4328211)
Don't you all think the idea of an NRA is laudable? There SHOULD be a group that says 'not one inch!'. I sure wish every other amendment had a group to say as much. It's up to the populace to overcome that resistance.

As for the NRA not being lynched...there is nothing they can do to change the minds of people who say such stupid things as "The blood of those children is on your hands NRA!! I hope you all get a bullet in the brain! Rot in Hell!!"
   3763. steagles Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:32 PM (#4328213)
It does cut into freedom in the same way that Obamacare does, but whatever.
by reducing the number of easily preventable debilitating injuries/deaths?
   3764. tshipman Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:38 PM (#4328218)
That doesn't mean an intelligent person reacts to it with a small mind, by thinking that tweaking gun control laws will amount to a hill of beans difference.


So why did it work in Australia?

When will you mark your beliefs to market?
   3765. Steve Treder Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:46 PM (#4328221)
Don't you all think the idea of an NRA is laudable? There SHOULD be a group that says 'not one inch!'.

Mmm-hmmm.
   3766. Dale Sams Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:48 PM (#4328222)
Mmm-hmmm.


Is it Bill Murray in Ghostbusters or Chevy in Caddyshack who says, "Well done. Well said."? I'm leaning with Chevy.
   3767. DJS and the Infinite Sadness Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:51 PM (#4328223)
Don't you all think the idea of an NRA is laudable? There SHOULD be a group that says 'not one inch!'. I sure wish every other amendment had a group to say as much. It's up to the populace to overcome that resistance.

It's a reason I maintain my membership with the ACLU, despite disagreeing at time vehemently with things they do. I would no longer renew if they started responding to attacks on free speech with "Nah, it's cool brah! That was mean ol' speech anyway, so who gives a ####?"

It's *supposed* to be hard to dislodge rights.
   3768. Howie Menckel Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:53 PM (#4328224)

A guy on right-wing radio today (I sometimes listen so you don't have to!) was claiming that South Carolina schools have "peace officers" - or something like that - who are at every school every day packing heat, so that no one could kill this many kids at their schools.

Release the hounds!



   3769. Joe Kehoskie Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:56 PM (#4328226)
3515. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: December 18, 2012 at 11:09 AM (#4327582)

So did Joe slither away in embarrassment after his tone-deaf rant against teacher salaries on the day tales of the Newtown teachers' bravery and selfless heroism continued to pile up? Or is that too much to expect?

LOL. The dolt who said that a person who was shot multiple times in the face was a victim "only in the most technical sense" and then disputed the idea that a person who killed kindergartners was "deranged" thinks someone else should "slither away in embarrassment." Good times.
   3770. Joe Kehoskie Posted: December 19, 2012 at 12:04 AM (#4328228)
So why did it work in Australia?

When will you mark your beliefs to market?

Why do you keep pretending that comparing a 310,000,000-person country that has a 250-year history of private gun ownership with low-population island nations is anything resembling a 1:1 comparison?
   3771. Joe Kehoskie Posted: December 19, 2012 at 12:15 AM (#4328236)
Ok, name ONE instance where a spree killer has been cut short in mid-rampage by an armed citizen

just ONE.

This is somewhat of a trick question, for two reasons:

1. The overwhelming majority of spree killers target so-called "gun-free" zones, where — surprise, surprise — law-abiding people don't carry guns; and

2. Just as "Plane lands safely" is rarely a headline, the national media doesn't rush to scenes where 20 people aren't killed.
   3772. spike Posted: December 19, 2012 at 12:20 AM (#4328238)
And here I thought these guys LIKED mavericks.

GOP Critics line up against Hagel.
   3773. Forsch 10 From Navarone (Dayn) Posted: December 19, 2012 at 12:28 AM (#4328240)
1. The overwhelming majority of spree killers target so-called "gun-free" zones, where — surprise, surprise — law-abiding people don't carry guns

Is it that or is it that they pick nearby places where there are sure to be a lot of people, or to which they have some connection, real or imagined?
   3774. Howie Menckel Posted: December 19, 2012 at 12:29 AM (#4328241)
I'm not really that into this topic, but the "just ONE" phrase was interesting. not sure if this qualifies from yesterday - the recent Oregon mall shooting

(and now I'll suddenly get accused of being an NRA member or something)

http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamascounty/index.ssf/2012/12/security_guard_said_he_had_rob.html

"Meli earlier told a KGW reporter that he heard three gunshots, and then positioned himself behind a pillar in the mall. Meli said he saw the gunman working on his rifle, pulling a charging handle and hitting the side of the weapon.

Meli said he then pulled out his Glock 22 pistol and aimed it at the suspect. But when he saw someone move behind Roberts, Meli decided against firing, concerned he might hit an innocent person.

Meli also told KGW that Roberts appeared to spot him and that afterward, Meli heard only one more shot, and suspects it was the one Roberts used to kill himself."

   3775. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 19, 2012 at 12:55 AM (#4328252)
It won't change my life any if stricter gun control laws were put into place. It does cut into freedom in the same way that Obamacare does, but whatever.

Well, being as how at last count you've made 2,888 posts denouncing Obamacare with a vehemence that Hollingsworth Hound himself would admire, can we now expect 2,887 posts proclaiming that gun control is the end of freedom as we've known it? Or are some whatevers more whatever than others?
   3776. Graham & the 15-win "ARod Vortex of suck" Posted: December 19, 2012 at 12:59 AM (#4328253)
"It's a reason I maintain my membership with the ACLU, despite disagreeing at time vehemently with things they do. I would no longer renew if they started responding to attacks on free speech with "Nah, it's cool brah! That was mean ol' speech anyway, so who gives a ####?""

Dan, out of curiosity, with which ACLU actions/stances do you disagree? I don't know enough about the ACLU to know of its more controversial stances (beyond defending the KKK and things of that nature).
   3777. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 19, 2012 at 01:05 AM (#4328255)
Dan, out of curiosity, with which ACLU actions/stances do you disagree? I don't know enough about the ACLU to know of its more controversial stances (beyond defending the KKK and things of that nature).

Pass me the smelling salts if the ACLU's support for many forms of affirmative action isn't one of them.
   3778. Morty Causa Posted: December 19, 2012 at 01:12 AM (#4328256)
Why do you keep pretending that comparing a 310,000,000-person country that has a 250-year history of private gun ownership with low-population island nations is anything resembling a 1:1 comparison?


How about Canada? Japan? The entire European continent taken together as compared to the United States? Does it still all come down to a wailing, "But we're different! And can't change! It's part of Holy Scripture!"


You right-wingers (and that includes libertarians) need to look at it like others look at a Abstinence Only solution.

Combined Population 391 million (Germany, France, Italy, UK, Spain, Canada, Australia)
Latest available annual gun homicides in the seven nations: 906
US Population 312 million and US Gun Homicides: 9,960
America's murder rate is roughly 15 times that of other wealthy countries which have tough gun control laws.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/opinion/the-gun-challenge-strict-laws-work.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/opinion/after-newtown-mourning-outrage-and-questions.html
   3779. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: December 19, 2012 at 01:23 AM (#4328259)
It was 1997. Woodham was constrained to a single shot deer rifle that had to be reloaded manually. While the principal's actions likely saved lives at the secondary target (the junior high) the assault weapons ban that was in effect from 1994-2004 almost certainly saved lives too.


except a higher number of 'mass shootings' (undefined term I know) have often been carried out before, during and after the assault weapons ban, with pistols, revolvers, handguns with standard and non-standard magazines, shotguns to include pump and break action, as well as bolt action rifles. Not a statement reflective of a position on a type of assault weapons ban (the previous version was very flimsy), just a criticism of its supposed efficacy.

   3780. Tripon Posted: December 19, 2012 at 01:35 AM (#4328261)
The NRA plan. Blame Video games, and Hollywood.

"If we're going to have a conversation, then let's have a comprehensive conversation," said one industry source. "If we're going to talk about the Second Amendment, then let's also talk about the First Amendment, and Hollywood, and the video games that teach young kids how to shoot heads.
"If you really want to stop incidents like this," the source continued, "passing one more law is not going to do a damn thing. Columbine happened when? In 1999. Smack in the middle of the original assault-weapons ban."
Indications that the NRA would soon end its period of self-imposed post-Newtown silence came after Feinstein announced her plan to introduce an updated version of the assault-weapons ban that she steered to passage in 1994, and which expired a decade later.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12/18/nra-to-push-back-soon-sources-say/#ixzz2FTOpI2Qn
   3781. Manny Coon Posted: December 19, 2012 at 01:44 AM (#4328263)


It was 1997. Woodham was constrained to a single shot deer rifle that had to be reloaded manually. While the principal's actions likely saved lives at the secondary target (the junior high) the assault weapons ban that was in effect from 1994-2004 almost certainly saved lives too. If Woodham had had access to a large clip semi-automatic, more than 9 people would have been shot that day.


Some variations of the AR-15 were still legal during the assault weapons ban, as were most semi-automatic handguns. He could have had something that fired faster if he wanted.
   3782. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: December 19, 2012 at 01:48 AM (#4328265)
quoting Morty's link to NYT's editorial

Like other shootings before it, the Newtown, Conn., tragedy has reawakened America to its national fixation with firearms. No country in the world has more guns per capita, with some 300 million civilian firearms now in circulation, or nearly one for every adult.

There are 300 million U.S. adults?

In the case of the United States, exponentially more: the American murder rate is roughly 15 times that of other wealthy countries, which have much tougher laws controlling private ownership of guns.

Is Russia not a wealthy nation? Nevermind, Russia's homicide rate is 4 times as high as the U.S. and they have 1/10th of the guns. Which country has a homicide rate that is 1/15th the U.S.' homicide rate? see page 20. Carlisle Moody's study on Firearms and Homicide from 2009.

answer: none.

Moody's study on Firearms and Homicide, 2009 (this is a pdf)

Fake but accurate I guess.
   3783. tshipman Posted: December 19, 2012 at 01:58 AM (#4328269)
Why do you keep pretending that comparing a 310,000,000-person country that has a 250-year history of private gun ownership with low-population island nations is anything resembling a 1:1 comparison?


Australia isn't an island. It's a continent.

So that's #1. Second of all, it has 22 million people. Japan has 122 million people.

Third of all, what about the study posted a couple of pages ago (linked here again for your reference) that showed that the federal assault weapons ban can be directly linked to a decrease in homicides.

Gun control has the inconvenient habit of working in every place it's been tried.
   3784. steagles Posted: December 19, 2012 at 02:07 AM (#4328270)
Is Russia not a wealthy nation? Nevermind, Russia's homicide rate is 4 times as high as the U.S. and they have 1/10th of the guns. Which country has a homicide rate that is 1/15th the U.S.' homicide rate? see page 20. Carlisle Moody's study on Firearms and Homicide from 2009.

answer: none.

Moody's study on Firearms and Homicide, 2009 (this is a pdf)

Fake but accurate I guess.
is russia really the standard you want to hold us to? this comes up with the death penalty, too. yeah, we're not the only country who executes its citizens, but if you look at who else is doing it, it should give you pause.
   3785. tshipman Posted: December 19, 2012 at 02:07 AM (#4328271)
Is Russia not a wealthy nation?


Russia per capita income: $12,993
United States per capita income: $48,328

So no, it's not. Neither is Mexico ($10,146), in case you're curious.
   3786. Tripon Posted: December 19, 2012 at 02:17 AM (#4328273)
(CNN) – Amid calls for tighter restrictions on guns following last week's deadly rampage in Connecticut, Texas Republican Gov. Rick Perry said at a tea party event Monday that anyone with a concealed handgun license in the Lone Star State should be able to take guns on public property – including schools.

"In the state of Texas, with our concealed handgun license, if you have been duly backgrounded and trained and you are a concealed handgun license carrying individual, you should be able to carry your handgun anywhere in this state," said Perry, who later added a person has the right to prohibit guns on their private property.

Provided they have the proper training and license, teachers should have "access to weapons in their school," Perry said. Individual school districts should be able to determine whether or not to allow firearms on their campuses, he said.


Classrooms are not secure at all. I feel like people who are proposing this haven't inside a classroom.
   3787. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: December 19, 2012 at 02:20 AM (#4328275)
If defined on per capita, no, not wealthy, not even close, yet somehow wealthy enough to be a G-8 nation. I'm still wondering which (undisputed) wealthy nation's rate is 1/15th the US, or where the hell are all of these US Adults they keep talking about. Lots of great perspective to be had on this topic, but the Times' math is way off.
   3788. Jim Wisinski Posted: December 19, 2012 at 02:44 AM (#4328284)
A guy on right-wing radio today (I sometimes listen so you don't have to!) was claiming that South Carolina schools have "peace officers" - or something like that - who are at every school every day packing heat, so that no one could kill this many kids at their schools.


My high school had an SRO (school resource officer - in fact there were two of them for at least one of the years I was there), which was a county Sheriff's deputy on permanent assignment to the school (he was armed). Since my high school would have been considered one of the lowest risk ones in the area as far as crime is concerned I assume all the other high schools had one as well. It wouldn't be surprising at all if some South Carolina schools had the same thing though probably not the elementary and middle schools.

Not that it really matters in many cases, most schools are pretty big so chances are any gunman is going to have plenty of time to kill a lot of people before any officer can get there.
   3789. Jim Wisinski Posted: December 19, 2012 at 02:46 AM (#4328286)
If teachers are allowed to have a gun in their classroom what are the odds that the country would even make it through the first semester before one of them got really pissed off at their misbehaving students and either brandished the gun or made a threat referencing it?
   3790. GregD Posted: December 19, 2012 at 02:54 AM (#4328289)
I don't doubt the innumeracy of newspaper reporters in this instance or in general, but just on homicide numbers in wikipedia from the UNODC, Japan's homicide rate is 1/14th of the US's and Hong Kong's is 1/20th. That list doesn't breakout by gun homicide vs other types.

In Tennessee, it sounds like the legislature is considering a bill to place armed and non-uniformed safety officers inside of schools, perhaps by arming and training teachers, on the theory that gunmen will just shoot a safety officer in uniform but will be dissuaded by the idea that there will be in every school an armed teacher somewhere in the building without a uniform.
   3791. Jay Z Posted: December 19, 2012 at 03:05 AM (#4328291)
Don't you all think the idea of an NRA is laudable? There SHOULD be a group that says 'not one inch!'. I sure wish every other amendment had a group to say as much. It's up to the populace to overcome that resistance.


Maybe, if the NRA was the ACLU of the 2nd amendment. They aren't.

It depends on what part of the 2nd amendment you care about. If you care about the well regulated militia being necessary to the security of the free state, then the reason the people keep and bear arms is for the militia. Now what security means could be questioned. A local police force? Defense against Indians? A backing support force to the federal army? A possible usurper to the federal army?

If it's the last one, as some favor, well that has failed. They tried with the Confederacy, the federals came up with enough forces to defeat them anyway, and the advocates for the usurpers/seceders were proposing continuing a practice that was barbaric anyway.

Anyway, the NRA, libertarians, et al prefer to focus on "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." And they'll also ignore that "the people" is a plural and that while the people as a whole may not have their rights infringed, it may be possible that individuals in the group could be. The way they read it, an individual cannot have their right to keep and bear arms infringed, militia or no militia.

If the NRA wanted to be the ACLU of the 2nd amendment, they would argue that individual persons should be allowed to own poison gas, nuclear weaponry, etc. I have no knowledge of them making such an argument. They argue for as few restrictions as possible against guns, while refraining from more unpopular stands that might hurt the overall cause. It's the very refusal to argue the tough cases that the preferred Constitutional interpretation would really merit that changes them from the ACLU of the 2nd amendment to a pro-gun advocacy group, which is what they truly are.
   3792. Joe Kehoskie Posted: December 19, 2012 at 03:11 AM (#4328292)
Gun control has the inconvenient habit of working in every place it's been tried.

If gun control had the inconvenient habit of working in every place it's been tried, Washington, D.C., and Chicago would have been the two safest cities in America for the past 30 years. We all saw how that worked out.

Russia per capita income: $12,993
United States per capita income: $48,328

So no, it's not. Neither is Mexico ($10,146), in case you're curious.

Where are you going with this? Mexico has some of the most oppressive gun laws in the world, yet it has some of the world's worst gun violence.*

And before the lefties here start blaming the U.S.'s gun laws for Mexico's gun violence, keep in mind that there's absolutely nothing stopping Mexico from doing a better job of securing its border with the U.S.

(* No thanks to the Obama administration.)
   3793. Joe Kehoskie Posted: December 19, 2012 at 03:16 AM (#4328295)
Anyway, the NRA, libertarians, et al prefer to focus on "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." And they'll also ignore that "the people" is a plural and that while the people as a whole may not have their rights infringed, it may be possible that individuals in the group could be. The way they read it, an individual cannot have their right to keep and bear arms infringed, militia or no militia.

Nonsense. The NRA doesn't argue that violent felons and the mentally deranged can't have their right to keep and bear arms infringed.

If the NRA wanted to be the ACLU of the 2nd amendment, they would argue that individual persons should be allowed to own poison gas, nuclear weaponry, etc. I have no knowledge of them making such an argument. They argue for as few restrictions as possible against guns, while refraining from more unpopular stands that might hurt the overall cause. It's the very refusal to argue the tough cases that the preferred Constitutional interpretation would really merit that changes them from the ACLU of the 2nd amendment to a pro-gun advocacy group, which is what they truly are.

More nonsense. The plain text of the Second Amendment says Americans have the right to "keep and bear" arms, not "keep and deploy" or "keep and launch from a safe distance of 20 miles." There's simply no real-world scenario in which a U.S. citizen would have reason to "bear" poison gas or tactical nuclear weapons on U.S. soil, and the fact the NRA and SAF don't argue for such a ludicrous position isn't a "gotcha" in the least.

Speaking of the NRA and ACLU, it's being bandied about as a given that the NRA has to give on certain aspects of gun rights. But what about the ACLU? Do the lefties here concede that the ACLU has to give when it comes to the government's ability to detain people who are, or are suspected of being, mentally deranged? Or are the lefties going to pretend that Newtown was 100 percent about gun rights and zero percent about anything else?
   3794. Joe Kehoskie Posted: December 19, 2012 at 03:41 AM (#4328298)
1. The overwhelming majority of spree killers target so-called "gun-free" zones, where — surprise, surprise — law-abiding people don't carry guns
Is it that or is it that they pick nearby places where there are sure to be a lot of people, or to which they have some connection, real or imagined?

I can't answer this without looking at a comprehensive list of spree killings and the reported motives for each, but I've read several articles in the past few days that have claimed that all but one spree killing in the past 20 years in which 3 or more people were killed occurred in a so-called "gun-free zone." (The Gabrielle Giffords shooting supposedly is the only exception.)

A few things you won’t hear about from the saturation coverage of the Newtown, Conn., school massacre:

Mass shootings are no more common than they have been in past decades, despite the impression given by the media.

In fact, the high point for mass killings in the U.S. was 1929, according to criminologist Grant Duwe of the Minnesota Department of Corrections.

Incidents of mass murder in the U.S. declined from 42 in the 1990s to 26 in the first decade of this century.


...

Economists John Lott and William Landes conducted a groundbreaking study in 1999, and found that a common theme of mass shootings is that they occur in places where guns are banned and killers know everyone will be unarmed, such as shopping malls and schools.

I spoke with Lott after the Newtown shooting, and he confirmed that nothing has changed to alter his findings. He noted that the Aurora shooter, who killed twelve people earlier this year, had a choice of seven movie theaters that were showing the Batman movie he was obsessed with. All were within a 20-minute drive of his home. The Cinemark Theater the killer ultimately chose wasn’t the closest, but it was the only one that posted signs saying it banned concealed handguns carried by law-abiding individuals. All of the other theaters allowed the approximately 4 percent of Colorado adults who have a concealed-handgun permit to enter with their weapons.

“Disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them as sitting ducks,” Lott told me. “A couple hundred people were in the Cinemark Theater when the killer arrived. There is an extremely high probability that one or more of them would have had a legal concealed handgun with him if they had not been banned.”

Lott offers a final damning statistic: “With just one single exception, the attack on congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in Tucson in 2011, every public shooting since at least 1950 in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry guns.”

— source: The Facts about Mass Shootings
   3795. Forsch 10 From Navarone (Dayn) Posted: December 19, 2012 at 04:05 AM (#4328301)
What about Ft. Hood?
   3796. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: December 19, 2012 at 04:16 AM (#4328302)
Dayn, he is going to claim it wasnt public since it was at ft. hood. but really at this point, not so much from here but the push back on gun bans has made me sick of the general public in this nation. I love guns think there fun to shoot, but I don't need one, I feel safer without one then with one.
   3797. Joe Kehoskie Posted: December 19, 2012 at 04:20 AM (#4328303)
What about Ft. Hood?

Not public, but it was also a "gun-free" zone, as the shooter's fellow military members were unarmed in the area in which the shootings occurred. (There's no way Hasan kills 13 and injures 29 more if he was in a room full of armed military members.)
   3798. odds are meatwad is drunk Posted: December 19, 2012 at 04:29 AM (#4328304)
called it!
   3799. Joe Kehoskie Posted: December 19, 2012 at 04:38 AM (#4328305)
called it!

Did you read past the first two words?
   3800. Forsch 10 From Navarone (Dayn) Posted: December 19, 2012 at 04:41 AM (#4328306)
Not public, but it was also a "gun-free" zone, as the shooter's fellow military members were unarmed in the area in which the shootings occurred.

The "public" part is hardly relevant, but if the second part is true, then fair enough. Although I'd be curious to know in what proximity armed personnel were stationed. The point is that I can't imagine that universal open-/concealed-carry would lead to an environment better equipped to abate a spree shooting than what was in place at Ft. Hood.
Page 38 of 62 pages ‹ First  < 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
aleskel
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 2 OMNICHATTER
(24 - 7:12pm, Oct 22)
Last: Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos

NewsblogSielski: A friend fights for ex-Phillie Dick Allen's Hall of Fame induction
(172 - 7:11pm, Oct 22)
Last: alilisd

NewsblogRoyals are not the future of baseball | FOX Sports
(28 - 7:11pm, Oct 22)
Last: Belfry Bob

NewsblogDealing or dueling – what’s a manager to do? | MGL on Baseball
(39 - 7:10pm, Oct 22)
Last: bobm

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3135 - 7:10pm, Oct 22)
Last: Misirlou's been working for the drug squad

NewsblogStatcast: Posey out at the plate
(9 - 7:05pm, Oct 22)
Last: Merton Muffley

NewsblogHow Wall Street Strangled the Life out of Sabermetrics | VICE Sports
(3 - 7:05pm, Oct 22)
Last: Sunday silence

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(873 - 7:02pm, Oct 22)
Last: Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site

NewsblogHunter Pence responds to Royals fan signs with monster Game 1 | MLB.com
(53 - 6:57pm, Oct 22)
Last: JAHV

NewsblogJerome Williams re-signs with Phils
(6 - 6:36pm, Oct 22)
Last: Brian White

NewsblogJay set for surgery — and for CF in 2015 : Sports
(1 - 6:32pm, Oct 22)
Last: Sleepy supports unauthorized rambling

NewsblogHitting coaches blamed for lack of offense - Sports - The Boston Globe
(18 - 5:40pm, Oct 22)
Last: Bhaakon

NewsblogBaseball's hardest throwing bullpen - Beyond the Box Score
(11 - 5:31pm, Oct 22)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(339 - 5:16pm, Oct 22)
Last: Merton Muffley

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-22-2014
(13 - 4:49pm, Oct 22)
Last: Walt Davis

Page rendered in 0.8032 seconds
52 querie(s) executed