2 minutes ago, EaglesfanfromND said:

What about Driscoll or Wanogho? How are they looking as far as backups at least?

Driscoll is RT

Just now, eglz1 said:

Does having a license to do those things pose a threat to those in power? Nope. Does having an armed citizenry? It could, better to disarm them.

The government already knows what guns you own. (at least for the most part) That said if it comes down to fighting a tyrannical government I'm thinking the crap will hit the fan before they start going door to door.  

 

4 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Sucks for Dillard’s development. We might need to spend a high pick on a tackle unless Prince is the steal we’re hoping for. 

Going into next year, we'll have 3 young OTs (Dillard, Driscoll, Prince). It'll be tough to pick an OT high. 
IMO, CB is #1 on the list next year.

He was 17 who gave him the gun to cross state lines?

There's video of him running AT the first victim by gas station before killing him & running away Stand your ground, protect your property doesn't apply when its not your property or even your state Or when your 17

 

12 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

So basically you have nothing and want to pull it out and compare. I feel good there, too. Enjoy my last reply to NC. Then you can zip it up.

I have nothing?  That’s moronic.  You continue to argue that the system can be manipulated yet have failed continuously to support that argument.  Can the defense meet the three step analysis in Sullivan? I don’t see how the defense overcomes (2) or (3).

Other-acts evidence is admissible: 1) if it is offered for a permissible purpose pursuant sub. (2) (a); 2) if it is relevant under the two relevancy requirements of s. 904.01; and 3) if its probative value is not substantially outweighed by the risk or danger of unfair prejudice under s. 904.03. State v. Sullivan, 216 Wis. 2d 768, 576 N.W.2d 30 (1998), 96-2244.

The statute referenced:

904.04  Character evidence not admissible to prove conduct; exceptions; other crimes.

(1)  Character evidence generally.  Evidence of a person's character or a trait of the person's character is not admissible for the purpose of proving that the person acted in conformity therewith on a particular occasion, except:

(a)  Character of accused.  Evidence of a pertinent trait of the accused's character offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same;

(b)  Character of victim.  Except as provided in s. 972.11 (2), evidence of a pertinent trait of character of the victim of the crime offered by an accused, or by the prosecution to rebut the same, or evidence of a character trait of peacefulness of the victim offered by the prosecution in a homicide case to rebut evidence that the victim was the first aggressor;

(c)  Character of witness.  Evidence of the character of a witness, as provided in ss. 906.07, 906.08 and 906.09.

 (2) Other crimes, wrongs, or acts.

(a)  General admissibility.  Except as provided in par. (b) 2., evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that the person acted in conformity therewith. This subsection does not exclude the evidence when offered for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.

I don’t see §972.11 as relevant because to a complaining witness.  The victim will not be a witness at trial.  If you don’t get your crap arguments from TV, I don’t know where you get them. It isn’t from the law.   I do suspect victim 2’s assault history may be admissible depending on the context but is harmed be the defendant’s lack of knowledge of the victims.  In the one case where the victim’s prior assault case was permissible in a self defense case in WI, the victim’s history was known to the defendant.  Note, §904.04 goes to character.  Typically that is the character of the accused or the witness   As to victims, as decedents character becomes much less of an issue because dead people cannot testify  

You have nothing.  Until you can cite me case law or statutory law from the state of WI, I suggest you might want to consider "zip”ping it. As to @NCiggles, while he and I were on opposite sides of the bar, I find him to be a knowledgeable attorney.  We have taken our differences to PMs because of the depths we can get into discussing law and he knows his stuff.  Your crap sounds like the BS thrown out on Bull every week.  You know how police offers watch cop shows and laugh and doctors watch medical shows and laugh?  We watch lawyer/courtroom shows and chortle. 

1 minute ago, DEagle7 said:

 

Lemme guess which one of those happen

Just now, RLC said:

Going into next year, we'll have 3 young OTs (Dillard, Driscoll, Prince). It'll be tough to pick an OT high. 
IMO, CB is #1 on the list next year.

Prince might be a bum, Driscoll could be a guard. 

Dillard... who the hell knows what he is. 

3 minutes ago, Utebird said:

Criminals break laws all the time one doesnt just not have any laws.

People steal all the time should we make stealing legal because criminals dont comply to the no stealing law?

Lots of people drive without licenses should we say no more driver licenses cause people dont comply.

What about murder thats illegal yet those fickle criminals just wont comply😒

The lengths at which people go to to push against gun laws that would decrease violence doesnt surprise me.

Without meaning to you've made my point.

Banning a certain class of guns won't get rid of them. The only people who will turn them in are people who generally will follow laws. Those inclined to use them for criminal activity will still have (and use) them.  The only way t change the cycle of violence is to change what's in peoples hearts. If you ever figure out how to do that, i'm all ears

Just now, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Was it? I thought it was the opposite way around. 

Nope. He's going to owe Bo and Berman Pastaficios every week during the season

 

13 minutes ago, OCEaglefan said:

Guess we don’t have to worry about Dillard stopping the bull rush

Now we have to worry about drive killing false starts and who is gonna play the other 40% of the LT snaps.

3 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

Based on Sportrac FA tracker (not sure if any of these guys opted out or retired etc and I've never heard of the large majority of them): 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/all/offensive-line/available/

Warford would be the guy you’d ideally want but he opted out. I think Leary isn’t great but at least serviceable. 

cordy Glenn Out there is interesting if he didn’t opt out. At least gives you an experienced backup at tackle. 

2 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Two things 

1. not convicted rapist. He had a warrant out to appear in court by charges brought on by his ex where he raped her. 

2. Elijah The kid in Colorado did absolutely nothing wrong and was a good kid. The fact he has been swept under the rug by all parties is disturbing cause his name is rarely ever mentioned anymore. 

Does that make him a rapist or not?

I don't even recall the kid from Colorado.

5 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I knew it was something where the eagles couldn’t sign him. 

I think technically they could because he's a FA so he doesn't fall under the opt-out agreement. But you would have to convince him to come back.

There will be some worthy OG on the market after cut downs, lots of them with cuts coming all at once

Hopefully birds are scouting nfl rosters 

14 minutes ago, EaglesfanfromND said:

And if he hung himself you'd be blaming the law that allowed him the rope? Like I said the blame is misplaced.

Whats the rope violence rate in America???

For every gun in America gun violence increases by 0.1% thats not a large number but notice in the presence of guns gun violence doesnt decrease.

Im going to guess the rope violence rate in America is pretty low.

Studies also show that men use more violent means of suicide than women and that their number one choice of suicide is firearms, not ropes knives or toasters.

Other studies also show that gun owners are far more likey to themselves or a loved one be a victim of gun violence(suicide accidental shooting) from their own gun then ever use it in self defense.

Im gonna guess thats not the case for ropes.

The propensity to harm oneself or others with a gun far exceed that of a rope knife baseball bat or other tool.

Like i said the lengths at which people go to to push against common sense gun laws that could decrease gun violence doesnt surprise me in US culture.

3 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Still need someone at LT for when Peters takes himself out of the game. Also for the minor injuries he'll likely have and miss a game

Would be great if Mailata can be serviceable 

He's said to be no match for BG.  He struggles against the 5th/6th DE on the roster.  He is going to get destroyed against starting DEs.

2 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Prince might be a bum, Driscoll could be a guard. 

Dillard... who the hell knows what he is. 

Exactly. If you draft an OT that high next year...you still don't have answers to those questions.

1 minute ago, Original Sin said:

There will be some worthy OG on the market after cut downs, lots of them with cuts coming all at once

Hopefully birds are scouting nfl rosters 

If they're not even before the Dillard injury they're not doing their job.

Just now, bpac55 said:

Does that make him a rapist or not?

I don't even recall the kid from Colorado.

Until you are convicted of the crime you can’t be a convicted rapist. You can be an accused rapist. 

granted His happened longer ago than these ones https://apple.news/ATL9heqTzRJyG-NZ4CACr6w

2 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

They better get somebody else up to speed real quick. What are the odds of Peters playing all the games this year? Or even half?

2 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I think technically he could because he's a FA so he doesn't fall under the opt-out agreement. But you would have to convince him to come back.

I’m guessing money and guaranteed money would sway him but I’m guessing The eagles don’t want to pay him that amount he wants 

1 minute ago, eglz1 said:

They better get somebody else up to speed real quick. What are the odds of Peters playing all the games this year? Or even half?

 

4 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Now we have to worry about drive killing false starts and who is gonna play the other 40% of the LT snaps.

 

9 minutes ago, greend said:

Dude for the 8 millionth time there are gun laws. Stop acting like it's a free for all. The federal government has a record of every gun I own. I have passed every back ground check. ENFORCE THE LAWS THAT WE HAVE NOW.  

I know there are laws im saying for the 8 millioneth time they need more.

If there was a gun law that showed it could decrease gun violence would you be opposed to it and why?