Jump to content
Connecticut Eagle

EMB Blog: 2022 Off-Season

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

How long is Doug still getting paid by is? Doubt he is desperate

OR!!! the League thinks he's rubbish. 

He didnt get any 2nd interviews and I think he only got 1 1st interview. 

I cant wait till this Fan base realizes how bad he is

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Ace Nova said:

I think you’re misinterpreting "decriminalization" (usually for personal use amounts only) vs legalization. 

All decriminalization does, is take street-level offenders that might have small, personal use amounts of a substance, out of the criminal court system and into the civil court system.  These offenders would still be held accountable but in the civil system, not the criminal system.  And in most cases, based on where it's been implemented, it seems to work.

The reason for legalization is three-fold

1) control the quality of drugs, with fentanyl, street drugs are toxic and thousands are dying

2) eliminate the profits going to organized crime, whether SA cocaine rings, the Taliban selling  opium and heroin, Syria selling speed, Chinese selling fentanyl, etc.

3) reduce the crime associated with obtaining and paying for drugs.

I'm for doing what's necessary to reduce harm to individuals and society, I'm not interested in a hypocritical moral position (alcoholics dissing drug addicts, etc.).

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Off topic, the late 90s/early 2000s were incredible for QB underdog stories. Kurt Warner, Tom Brady, Jeff Garcia, Rich Gannon. Don't know how possible that kind of thing is in the digital/analytics age.

Nobody cares about football,  pal. Sheesh

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, austinfan said:

The reason for legalization is three-fold

1) control the quality of drugs, with fentanyl, street drugs are toxic and thousands are dying

2) eliminate the profits going to organized crime, whether SA cocaine rings, the Taliban selling  opium and heroin, Syria selling speed, Chinese selling fentanyl, etc.

3) reduce the crime associated with obtaining and paying for drugs.

I'm for doing what's necessary to reduce harm to individuals and society, I'm not interested in a hypocritical moral position (alcoholics dissing drug addicts, etc.).

It's actually fairly easy. 

Legalize and tax the ever living poo out of weed. 

Get caught with C/crack/heroin/etc mandatory 20 years in prison, no parole. no matter the amount

Get caught with any fentanyl(any amount) get the death penalty. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Off topic, the late 90s/early 2000s were incredible for QB underdog stories. Kurt Warner, Tom Brady, Jeff Garcia, Rich Gannon. Don't know how possible that kind of thing is in the digital/analytics age.

Nothing says "underdog story" like growing up in a rich white town(currently where I live) with amazing school districts. Getting a full ride to a high school that tuition costs more then most colleges, then getting a full ride to an actual college and then getting drafted in the NFL. 

Rich Gannon is far from a underdog story. Same as Brady. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

So he is an etremely stupid idiot, who likes to argue/fight - when he is on probation - instead of walking away- leaving?  I mean cmon- I'm 57 years old, and the last time I got into a shoving match I was in my 30's, and not on probation. It's not hard to avoid, or de-esculate.. SMH. 

 

Bigger question- what do people who are against punishing crimes think we should do to reduce the amount of crimes being comitted? I mean if you are not for punishing those who commit the crimes, what do you suggest? Keeping in mind life is not some utopian fantasy where everyone is reasonable and rationale and gets along if we just let them. Too many progressives have this idealistic view, example, if we make having guns illegal, there wont be any gun deaths or crimes. And it's about as far from reality as you can get. SO I am very curious, if you dont like punsihment, what do you suggest? 

 

Didn't say I don't like punishment I just don't think it's very effective and I definitely don't thing more punishment would be more effective.

I think I. uSA we operate the criminal justice system the same way we do our health care, we treat the symptoms instead of the underlying cause of those symptoms.

The question then would be what are the underlying causes of crime?

Different theory and data and studies suggest different things, one of those theories is that crime decreases when basic human needs are met, Maslow's hierarchy of needs, food water shelter love ect...

The bonobo chimpanzee hypothesis suggest that competition for limited basic resources lead to violence tendencies.

Multiple studies show that lower income areas with higher density populations have higher crime rates and hypothesize it's due to lack of equitable resources and competition for them. I sited one of those studies In a previous post and sited another about the bonobo and chimp hypothesis In another.

If you would like me to repost those to you I can.

Either way leading social theory suggests that a more equitable society would decrease violence and crime.

I think locking people up chopping hands off is the easy thing to do, we pay for it as tax payers where as making society more equitable would require those who benefit from scarcity to actually do something that might cut into their bottom line.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Speaking of not making sense to me, WTF are the Bears doing hiring Matt Eberflus? I guess he sold them on his plan for Fields, but eeeehhhh

Maybe the Bears understand Fields isn't going to win games by throwing the football any more than Hurts is -- and they'll have to operate a run-first offense in combination with a top-10 defense.  Eberflus is a good choice with keeping a strong defense in mind.  I'll wait and see who they bring in as OC and QB coach before I pass judgment  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alcohol was illegal once.  It can be addictive, destructive, and deadly…and fun.

If it can be illegal at one point…and legal now…we are just drawing lines.  You can debate cigarettes, marijuana, cocaine, heroine, LSD, meth, whatever.

There’s no inherently right or wrong place to draw the line of legality.  If you don’t want to ban all of it or allow all of it, you are all just debating where to move the needle. 
 

But if you want to legally play with fire, just don’t use my hose to put it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Depends on the crime. Non-violent property crimes should be treated no more harshly than white collar crimes, if you're going to crack down hard on petty theft, you should crack down hard on tax evasion, corporate fraud, etc. Why should a loser who steals hundreds get a worse sentence than a well connected guy who steals millions or lies about the danger of his product.

Now the small minority of habitual violent criminals (we not talking the drunk in a bar fight, unless he does it on a regular basis), the murderers, rapists, etc. are a different animal. No matter what the reason for their behavior, they're too dangerous to allow out, at least until their 40s or 50s, when there's a sharp drop in recidivism.

Public policy shouldn't be made on the basis of emotion, or individual morality (you may think drug use is wrong, but do you drink - then you're a hypocrite) but what is best for society as a whole, balancing individual rights and the public good, and should be based not on prejudice but empirical evidence, and updated as better data and analysis is available.

No problem with any of this. However, our police reform policies often have been missing the bolded category and allowing them to continually and habitually commit crimes, and often they escalate in nature. (See recent Christmas Day Parade "CRASH" as the progessives have called it as example of some one who should not have been out in society) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm for the legalization of murder.

 

1.) We can rid society of people that cause a drain of resources 

2.) We can live more peaceably without people that have different opinions than the rest of us

3.) We can cause less accidental deaths by planning them ahead (causing less pain on the "victim")

 

I'm not for making laws because of some moral thing I'm all about society, blah,blah, blah.

 

Before I get reported this is sarcasm folks.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, greend said:

I'm for the legalization of murder.

 

1.) We can rid society of people that cause a drain of resources 

2.) We can live more peaceably without people that have different opinions than the rest of us

3.) We can cause less accidental deaths by planning them ahead (causing less pain on the "victim)

 

I'm not for making laws because of some moral thing I'm all about society, blah,blah, blah.

 

Before I get reported this is sarcasm folks.

The Purge.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, greend said:

I'm for the legalization of murder.

 

1.) We can rid society of people that cause a drain of resources 

2.) We can live more peaceably without people that have different opinions than the rest of us

3.) We can cause less accidental deaths by planning them ahead (causing less pain on the "victim")

 

I'm not for making laws because of some moral thing I'm all about society, blah,blah, blah.

 

Before I get reported this is sarcasm folks.

I Dont Believe You GIFs - Get the best GIF on GIPHY

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Freaky.

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Off topic, the late 90s/early 2000s were incredible for QB underdog stories. Kurt Warner, Tom Brady, Jeff Garcia, Rich Gannon. Don't know how possible that kind of thing is in the digital/analytics age.

Chris Chandler too 

One would think with the league rules benefitting passing and protecting qbs more less known and would be more succesful.

Yet seems all it did is pad the stats if crappy qbs and make the good ones even better 

I mean look at qbs like Goff and cousins, they put up meaningless stats against defenses that aren't allowed to play defense yet when they go up against a team that has a better QB, which is most, or a marginally better QB paired with a marginally functional defense they lose.

They throw for 350 yards and 2 tds but they still lose because the opposition passed for 400 yards and 4 tds.

Back in the day running games and defenses could limit the inadequacies of ones QB and even the playing field 

In today's NFL if your QB sucks or isn't on par with the oppositions QB you're in trouble.

I miss defense and running, I enjoyed watching the eagles pound the ball this year it's too bad they didn't have a defense or a qb to make up the difference☹️

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Alcohol was illegal once.  It can be addictive, destructive, and deadly…and fun.

If it can be illegal at one point…and legal now…we are just drawing lines.  You can debate cigarettes, marijuana, cocaine, heroine, LSD, meth, whatever.

There’s no inherently right or wrong place to draw the line of legality.  If you don’t want to ban all of it or allow all of it, you are all just debating where to move the needle. 
 

But if you want to legally play with fire, just don’t use my hose to put it out.

It's better to get caught with a pound of coke than it is to get a DUI. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ManuManu said:

 

To go from Allen to Tua is hilarious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sure wish Deshaun Watson tipped better after his Happy Endings.  Then we’d be talking about Jalen Swags and his accession to top 20 status.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, schuy7 said:

Freaky.

 

Swag

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

I sure wish Deshaun Watson tipped better after his Happy Endings.  Then we’d be talking about Jalen Swags and his accession to top 20 status.  

Why did you capitalize happy endings Mr. Kraft?

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

It's actually fairly easy. 

Legalize and tax the ever living poo out of weed. 

Get caught with C/crack/heroin/etc mandatory 20 years in prison, no parole. no matter the amount

Get caught with any fentanyl(any amount) get the death penalty. 

How'd that work in Eighteenth Century England?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Utebird said:

Didn't say I don't like punishment I just don't think it's very effective and I definitely don't thing more punishment would be more effective.

I think I. uSA we operate the criminal justice system the same way we do our health care, we treat the symptoms instead of the underlying cause of those symptoms.

The question then would be what are the underlying causes of crime?

Different theory and data and studies suggest different things, one of those theories is that crime decreases when basic human needs are met, Maslow's hierarchy of needs, food water shelter love ect...

The bonobo chimpanzee hypothesis suggest that competition for limited basic resources lead to violence tendencies.

Multiple studies show that lower income areas with higher density populations have higher crime rates and hypothesize it's due to lack of equitable resources and competition for them. I sited one of those studies In a previous post and sited another about the bonobo and chimp hypothesis In another.

If you would like me to repost those to you I can.

Either way leading social theory suggests that a more equitable society would decrease violence and crime.

I think locking people up chopping hands off is the easy thing to do, we pay for it as tax payers where as making society more equitable would require those who benefit from scarcity to actually do something that might cut into their bottom line.

 

 

 

This is pretty much what I thought you would say and not surprised in the least.  It sounds like you would be for a socialistic form of government where all your basic needs are met, and you believe this would reduce crime?  SOunds good in theory. This gets to the root of what I was asking- is it idealistic? Is it actually feasible? Nothing wrong with having some idealistic aspirations, as long as we keep them grounded in reality.

Do you believe that Socialism is the answer and will work in reality? 

no - I do not think Socialism works in reality - it works for a while, then the resources get thinned out as there is no motivation to succeed, or exceed because no matter what you do, your needs are provided for.  I think Humans need to have a reason, motivation to live, in order to produce. There needs to be an incentive. If we all get exactly the same things, there is no longer any incentives to succeed. If you inact a stepped program where those who produce less, only get the bare minimum, and those who produce more get excesses, this will only get you back to what we have now. Crime will still be prevelent. People who dont have what others have, will work to get it by any means necessary. And there is always a % of the population who only cares about themselves.  Lastly, and more importantly humans by nature are wired to crave freedom. 

Since I do not believe that Socialism will work in reality,  I would ask, again, if not Socialism, and not for punishing criminals, what else you got? 

 

 

 

25 minutes ago, greend said:

I'm for the legalization of murder.

 

1.) We can rid society of people that cause a drain of resources 

2.) We can live more peaceably without people that have different opinions than the rest of us

3.) We can cause less accidental deaths by planning them ahead (causing less pain on the "victim")

 

I'm not for making laws because of some moral thing I'm all about society, blah,blah, blah.

 

Before I get reported this is sarcasm folks.

Carosel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, ManuManu said:

 

As long as he doesnt end up in NY I'm out with it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

So he is an etremely stupid idiot, who likes to argue/fight - when he is on probation - instead of walking away- leaving?  I mean cmon- I'm 57 years old, and the last time I got into a shoving match I was in my 30's, and not on probation. It's not hard to avoid, or de-esculate.. SMH. 

 

Bigger question- what do people who are against punishing crimes think we should do to reduce the amount of crimes being comitted? I mean if you are not for punishing those who commit the crimes, what do you suggest? Keeping in mind life is not some utopian fantasy where everyone is reasonable and rationale and gets along if we just let them. Too many progressives have this idealistic view, example, if we make having guns illegal, there wont be any gun deaths or crimes. And it's about as far from reality as you can get. SO I am very curious, if you dont like punsihment, what do you suggest? 

 

I am not against punishment.  I am against incarceration for extended periods of time for a lot of offenses.  I don't think incarceration serves any rehabilitative function. It is costly.  It creates a bigger government.    As system that is invested in criminal justice and incarceration allows for prosecutors to have leverage to take away innocent people's freedom.  The reason it is necessary is when a person places other people at risk.  In domestic violence situations, incarceration is the only practical way to avoid further violence.  I think we should take a utilitarian view on the morality of it.  We should look at methods that are short of incarceration to change behaviors. Where that is problematic is that people are invested in the idea of retribution and revenge.  We want wrongdoers to suffer.  The problem is that suffering doesn't seem to make a difference.  It is also an emotional and irrational response to larger problems that we should be rational about.  

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...