1 minute ago, Utebird said:

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 lawd that could decrease gun violence doesnt surprise me in US culture.

So for every 10 guns in America gun violence increases by 1%?  The Small Arms Survey stated that U.S. civilians alone account for 393 million. 

You might wanna check your math

4 minutes ago, RLC said:

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

I would still draft a tackle high. Driscoll is a 4th rounder and think he projects better as a interior OL and prince is a 7th. Not banking on mid to late round picks to be projected starters. If they do then great i have multiple guys i can use in a trade to get more assets. 

also it’s not as if lane isn’t getting older as well. So if i draft a tackle i could also use it as insurance for dillard and potentially lane’s long term replacement. That’s not a bad thing.  

1 minute ago, RLC said:

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

This is a confusing stance considering the importance of the position. 

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

 

 

Maybe Opeta, he played LT in college.

 

1 hour ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I actually think you are going to see a lot of sloppy bad football to start the season. Not like it’s great football the first four weeks normally but i feel this year it is likely to be worse. At least then you get some preseason snaps and combined practices With other teams which definitely helps. 

I think you're going to see a lot of injuries from all teams the first few weeks of football. Those preseason games and scrimmages are huge with getting contact. Because it's never 100% And it's better to ease into it then go Week 1 100%. It will be ugly this year. But at least it's going to be all teams and not just us

 

10 minutes ago, greend said:

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.  

You heard what Beto O'Rourke said, yes? "Hell yes, we're coming for your AR-15", or words to that effect. At least the pot smugglers that lose business to legalized weed will have a new line of products.

38 minutes ago, greend said:

I have never met an ice cream I wouldn't eat. Soft serve chocolate is my fav. But Moose tracks or eagles touchdown sundae are my favorite out of the carton

I wish ice cream liked me as much as I like it.  Goes right to fat. 

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

 

Who’s PP? He mean BB

Just now, Asg 15 said:

So for every 10 guns in America gun violence increases by 1%?  The Small Arms Survey stated that U.S. civilians alone account for 393 million. 

You might wanna check your math

0.01% sorry forgot a zero.

Its a small amount and notice it doesnt decrease.

One also has to take into consideration that gun violence accounts for any time a gun is fired and someone is hit with a bullet. Homicide, suicide, accidental, cop shootings, non lethal ect...

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

Who’s PP? He mean BB

Pass protection

Just now, LeanMeanGM said:

Pass protection

Ah makes sense now. 

9 minutes ago, RLC said:

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

Hell that was the whole point of drafting Dillard

3 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

I wish ice cream liked me as much as I like it.  Goes right to fat. 

I hear ya. My wife's been losing weight. The problem is i'm finding it.

2 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

2 Part question...

1) why did we put jordan mailata at the LT position when it's probably the hardest to learn and defiantly most important

2) is he that green that we cant use him as a backup/starter at RG 

I think its more his size.  Isn't he like 6 9?

19 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

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. 

I'm not even reading a word your drivel. From how far I had to scroll it must me a nice childish BS rant. Kudos. 

2 minutes ago, Asg 15 said:

Hell that was the whole point of drafting Dillard

Yup.

The backup LT will play because Peters is not playing every snap. I hope it's Mailata, just so we can see what that looks like. 

7 minutes ago, Utebird said:

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?

No they don't other than gun shows. And a vague "if there was a law that could reduce gun violence would you be opposed to it" isn't something I could give an answer on. I'm done with this convo today. And that's not meant as me thinking I'm superior it's just that I'm tired of it and we've drug down the blog long enough.

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

My top three positional needs for next years draft at the current moment are DE, LT and CB. With center not far behind if kelce retires. 

I think they have been scouting centers and definitely seem to value G/C versatility.  

 

29 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

F

 

They got the MRI results already. I thought they would wait for the swelling to go,down. 

Just now, RLC said:

Yup.

The backup LT will play because Peters is not playing every snap. I hope it's Mailata, just so we can see what that looks like. 

Seeing what he "looks like" if he isn't ready could get Carson IR'ed, especially from the blind side.

13 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

We fight ourselves(red vs blue) before we go after the government. 

red or blue will be in power and if they are coming after the guns guess which color it will be?

2 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

until you really punish and enforce the current laws, NO

Cause these stupid laws only hurt the people who play by the rules

The scumbags who skirt the rules, who cause the violence, who do illegal things are the issue

 

Enforce the rules we have now with stiffer penalties. 

If that were the case whats the point of seat belt laws in a car???Seat belt laws have shown to decrease vehicular deaths yet if "stupid laws"  only hurt people that follow the rules why not just enforce speeding and traffic laws with stiffer penalties for those jerks on the road causing all the violence by recklessly driving and get rid of those stupid seat belt laws?

 

1 minute ago, NCiggles said:

I think they have been scouting centers and definitely seem to value G/C versatility.  

 

I do as well. I just still don’t trust herbig. I think if there was a guy in the 3/4th they’d liked with positional versatility and athleticism closet to kelce pull the trigger.