User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.6257 seconds
53 querie(s) executed

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.
...and you say death is not an option?
There are Canadians who are, culturally speaking, essentially American...
Matt Yglesias
I don't think* they had a "come to jesus" moment regarding guns though in the same way Australia did though. Still I am willing to look at the Canadian experience with regard to guns, no problem, though I still think we can ;learn from other nations including Australia.
* I don't know much about Canada, gun control, and rates of gun violence actually.
That is the point, isn't it? You shouldn't look for a come to Jesus moment, you should look at a country that hasn't taken such a divergence.
He'd mean the cost, I assume.
We are not proceeding lightly. This issue has been discussed for a long time. This isn't the first incident sparking calls for legislation.
"and everyone knows that liberals don't plan to stop at 'stricter gun control' but they will always be agitating for stricter and stricter gun control as long as anyone is allowed to bear any arm."
That is where the whole 'Constitutional Republic with systems of checks and balances' comes into play. Whatever is passed next year will be no more strict than can pass Congress (with the House still in 'R' control). If it is too strict, Dems will suffer in the next elections. If the public senses that it does not go far enough (and that that is due to 'R' grandstanding), the Rs will suffer in the next elections. 'Stricter and Stricter' gun control will only happen if the public wants it.
I'd think the better comparison for the US would be the country that was gung-ho about the "wild west, shoot 'em up" gun culture, *like America,* then had a big change after a mass shooting, *like America is sort of stumbling towards.*
Yes, but there are a quarter of Canadians who are quite different. Australia is probably a better match because of the single dominant English speaking protestant culture angle. And the Canadian frontier mentality is very different from the American/Australian one. Canada is the country of Peace, Order, and Good Government.
How can you use a country that has not instituted any gun control reforms to see if gun control reforms work? Australia is good because they are a very similar country to us and then put in place a gun control regime in response to a tragedy. So we can look at them to see what happened to them when they did that.
Ah so we are back to American Exceptionalism - short bus edition.
Is exactly one of those urban liberal gun enthusiasts the anti-gun contingent here should hate.
Of all the photos of weenie chickenhawk rightwing pundits trying to look butch with a gun floating around the intertubes, none is more ridiculous looking than the one of Matty Woodchuck and his pal Megan McAddled with shotguns at a firing range.
Again I make the point that the need to have a gun depends on where one lives. Rural people need them. Urban and suburban hipsters don't, even if their neighborhoods haven't been completely gentrified yet.
that is the very thing that they warn about every time a democrat is elected as president.
it's one of their scare topics
i know, i am on the mailing list
Learning that Fosters basically doesn't exist in Australia was like learning that Santa Claus doesn't. And after I spent a good bit of time there, I'd say that Australia was even more like America than Canada. Except, there Right wingers aren't as paranoid about Big Government.
well, s8x.
I for one was outraged when Boehner praised Fidel Castro.
Agreed. I'd also think that Australia has more recent immigrants of darker hue (not to mention their aboriginal people), which is exactly what wingnut American exceptionalists are talking about when when they say, for instance, that European social democracies which provide far better services to their citizens aren't good comparisons because of our ethnic and cultural diversity. IOW, they don't have freeloading n****** they have to give free health care to but we do, so it won't work here and we shouldn't try.
Gawker said this happened AT THE SAME TIME OF THE NRA PRESS CONFERENCE.
A Belgian guy once explained to me that Australia = USA and New Zealand = Canada.
I've never been to Australia or New Zealand (and I'm not sure if I've met any Kiwis) so I have no idea if that's true or not.
Probably a safe pick, given the battles President Obama and the Democrats will be fighting in the near future. He'll sail through confirmation as easily as anyone could.
The worst case scenario is Brown picks up the Senate seat, and he's barely a Republican.
It's completely true. To a lesser extent, it's Australia=USA=Britain, and New Zealand=Canada=Ireland. But the Australia/New Zealand = America/Canada comp is almost perfect, except the Maori fill the role that the French and the Indians fit in Canada.
I think it just means French-Canadian goalies should do some kind of ceremonial dance before each game.
By the way, did anyone see the New Zealand baseball team's performance before their WBC game against Taiwan? I was all ready for an awkward, forced experience, but I think they pulled it off mostly.
Never would have happened if rural roads weren't a gun-free zone.
Only during playoffs. So not this year.
That is just perfect, even down to the way they look at sports. Australians basically have their love for sports split between Aussie Rules, Rugby (2 types) and cricket while Kiwis are just obsessed with Rugby Union, I mean really obsessed, to the detriment of all other sports similar to Canadians and hockey. The one difference that I do notice between Canadians and New Zealand is that Kiwis are a lot more nationalistic. I've yet to meet a non-cocky New Zealander.
Oh and either ahead of "Molson Canadian"
As of when I was in high school (2002), the anniversary of the Ecole Polytechnique shooting was commemorated throughout the school.
One of the joys of spending Christmas back in Canada...I just bought a 24 of OV!
(Not that I particularly enjoy the taste of OV...I just enjoy being able to purchase it)
Higher costs for worse care.
In what way are you getting worse care now than you were two years ago?
I get the impression that they've hired a new publicist/speechwriter who isn't quite conversant with the pre-existing strategies/talking points.
Can-can would intimidate the shit out of other hockey players.
Well, if this doesn't prove that the NRA is responsible for everything bad that ever happens with a gun, I don't know what does.
You're teetering on the edge of irrationality here, Ray Ray.
Yeah, Reason and their usually crazy commenters are not too happy with LaPierre's statement.
Jackbooted thugs, IIRC.
Say what you will about the tenets of National Socialism...
I don't know if nationalistic is the right word, but yeah, Kiwis are definitely more proud of their Kiwiness than Canadians seem to be of their Canadianess, or at least more outspoken about it. And they're much more outspoken and in-your-face with respect to their relationship with Australia; Canadians seem to go more for passive aggression when talking to/about Americans.
In this case, obsessing about gun control as a way to address the problem makes as much sense as invading Iraq as a response to 9/11. It's a misidentification of the problem, which in this case is insanity with the capability of doing serious violence that hasn't reared its head yet.
Gun control has nothing to do with this issue. Lanza tried to buy a gun - and when hit with the mandatory waiting period found another way. You can put Lanza on a list that prevented him from purchasing weapons - how one would do this is unclear when he hadn't committed a crime of any type yet, though I suppose a pyschiatrist's note would do it - but that wouldn't have helped here, because the guns he used were not his own.
It's not a "probabilities" issue. It's an issue where gun control has absolutely no relevance to the problem. Because someone who is so crazy that he will shoot up a school of kids will find a way.
Do you think that there would still be the same number of school shootings if there were no gun control laws at all?
Link
Again, your beliefs have no grounding in fact. I don't even get what the point of talking about this with you is. It would be like trying to convince snapper of the Pope's fallibility.
The point being made was that your thinking is too anchored by absolutes to be relevant.
There are other solid observations:
EDIT: CoB, we had this discussion earlier in the week. The bar for semi-sane Reason commentary is extremely low.
My favoritest rationale. Compelling, succinct, and inarguable.
This is where the argument crumbles. It simply isn't empirically true that without guns -- or even with guns, but without the type he had access to -- Lanza was 100% likely to have killed exactly 26 kids.
Not only isn't that true, it literally can't be true. Let's use "thinking man" tools -- everything's exactly the same other than weaponry. One million trials. The expected death toll is 26, standard deviation 0, mode one million, range 0?
Um, no.
Not if it's Natural Light. That's like 1.25 MGD or Budweisers per hour.
This brings back one of the great quotes of all time from my rural youth: "Let's go sit in a snowbank and get drunk." You start out like that, by the time you hit a certain age you really aren't feeling anything until the first case is down.
That must be the story here, in the unlikely event that the idiot isn't exaggerating. The beers in my fridge right now are Rahr's Stormcloud and Tommyknocker Pickaxe IPAs. 7½ of those in an hour and you'd have to assume the fœtal position.
Rural people need them
Raccoon walked into the kitchen last night and started helping itself to food from the cat dish. We escorted it out, closed the garage door over, and it literally knocked on the door to ask back in. I was thinking that's the closest I'll come to needing a gun. Call me a pacifist, but I don't want to start a gunfight with anybody, even if he's helping himself to my meagre possessions.
There is no way to make a head-on crash with a tractor-trailer survivable, so forget about having seatbelts and airbags in a car...
Edit: can't type
Arkansas
"Well officer, I do have a dog on a leash."
These dog walkers need to put it in a bag.
It's pretty ####### obvious that the effectiveness of Ray's meds has been seriously compromised.
I guess it really is too much to ask that law enforcement officials know anything at all about, you know, the law.
cityrating.com says this about Paragould:
There seem to be tons of larcenies and thefts in Paragould, for some reason. I don't know if shaking down dogwalkers is the best way to address those problems, but maybe that's why I'm not police chief in Paragould.
Interestingly enough, the Paragould police website proudly says that in 2003 Paragould was the Safest City in Arkansas. I don't know if that's really the message they want to keep sending. It doesn't make the last decade look like a resounding success.
In their defense, stop and identify is a pretty murky of law. As far as I know though, there's no explicit stop and identify law in Arkansas that would require a person to actually answer/present an ID. So they should maybe probably possibly know that.
A hefty male has about 170 ounces of blood in him. Linn drank 540 ounces of beer. This means that his blood was 317% beer.
According to this calculator, if he weighed 220 pounds then at the end of his spree his BAC would be .73. A hair over 9 times the legal limit, and .23 over the "possible death" line at Wikipedia. That's not good.
*holds up poop bag*
*gets shot*
Not for me, as I'm a bit of a light-weight, but this isn't too far out of the normal for a friend or two on a Victoria Day weekend at the cottage.
I've probably never had more than 24 beers in a day...though that would likely be spread over 10-12 hours.
That's scientifically inaccurate, but the GOP thinks this method should be given equal time on the curriculum.
Weird. That drink is semi-popular in rural Saskatchewan as a "girly" drink called a "Red Eye" (minus the salt and lime). Though upon looking it up a "Red Eye" is a coffee based alcoholic drink. These prairie folk have to get with it!
What's so great about this is how purely fascistic it is. Regular cops asking a dog walker for his ID is slippery slope fascism, but a guy in body armor carrying a military rifle asking a dog walker for ID is pure and naked fascism. All the way; it even looks fascistic. I like it. It's a litmus test. If you think this is a good idea then you support fascism. Might as well get it out in the open.
Why on earth would you do that? I realize that Memphis isn't safe, either, but at least it doesn't smell like sewage and it's not like it's that far away.
Funny, I was just mentioning Wade Boggs in another thread.
That could be the refrain for my entire life so far.
I think Kerry will be a very good Secretary of State.
"An insult to the brain" that maybe even trumps Dylan Thomas's final binge.
Ichiro could drink that much if he wanted to.
The primary argument against Kerry for state is that it 1) validates the GOP's insane attacks on Susan Rice (already accomplished) and 2) it opens up a potential Senate seat for the GOP in MA.
Oh, I do, too -- that wasn't meant as a slam... I'm just saying 'boring guy, career politician/government official, reached for the brass ring once and lost'.... There's no shame in being Adlai Stevenson.
In fact - folks that have issues with some of Obama's more Bushian foreign policy choices really ought to be applauding this. Kerry has been relatively consistent as a critic on things like drone warfare and unilateral decision making (he just hasn't made a point of picking fights in the press with the administration). Keeping in mind that the SoS works for the President, not the other way around - I do think there's a very real possibility Kerry will be perhaps the biggest advocate for restrained and internationally respectful foreign policy we've seen in most of our lives.
"Linn claimed that he had consumed 45 beers in the 6 hours before leaving his Indiana home to set fire to the mosque"
so if he had a case of fire's remorse, he could have put out the flames himself. no hose could keep up with him
Working on Wall Street I usually see some SWATs with AR-15s on the corner of Wall and Broad Street, I've never seen them stop anyone, what I usually see is them posing for pictures with tourists...
The NYC stop and frisk guys are usually just the regular uniformed cops... and they don't do that as much as they used to, and even it wasn't universal, they pretty much targeted loitering men between 15-30 years of age...
That's a good point. The balance of power between the more hawkish Dems (Clinton's camp) and the more dovish Dems (Biden's camp) just shifted a little, maybe.
I agree, which is why I like him. Republicans will probably like him less in the end, but then, I'm not a Republican and the stuff on which I side with the Republicans ain't foreign policy.
Yes, or maybe a tweak in the numbers that amounted to a pimple on an elephant's ass.
How does "gun control" apply to this situation? The gun control laws kicked in -- and "worked." He found a way anyway.
He could have done serious damage with a six-shooter or with any number of guns that nobody has a prayer of banning. Does anyone dispute this?
If he had driven his car through the window, would people obsess over "stricter car control laws" as a means to logically address the problem? This is silliness.
Yes, and this is basically along the lines of my first response to today's NRA press conference. The NRA has decided to see the left's insanity on this issue in response to the school shooting, and match it on the opposite end.
The pimple on that elephant's ass was a child's life, Ray.
Which is why people want to increase the controls, Ray. The existing laws worked. Unfortunately, existing law allowed his mother to have stockpiled weapons of an absurd nature, and he used those instead.
Your argument that "the law worked, so there's no point in trying to improve the law, because the law would never work" is...convoluted, to say the least.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main