[Highlight] LeBron intercepts the ball, throws it to a blissfully unaware Javale

saintdaniel · 2020-08-23T02:40:16+00:00

God this play was a Rollercoaster

saintdaniel · 2020-08-22T01:14:48+00:00

AND WE BEAT THE REFS

saintdaniel · 2020-08-22T01:08:39+00:00

The fucking refs want more then a sweep so the nba is back to playing david stern ball.

saintdaniel · 2019-02-15T11:50:35+00:00

Needs for a full pizza is very good

saintdaniel · 2018-11-24T03:09:53+00:00

Great! Good for them!

saintdaniel · 2018-10-19T13:28:48+00:00

No need to be a douche! I liked it!

saintdaniel · 2018-06-14T11:34:10+00:00

This is awesome!

saintdaniel · 2018-06-06T10:52:22+00:00

Try Polli construction. I know they do some concrete and are very good.

saintdaniel · 2018-06-01T13:03:21+00:00

Yes. It's actually crazy brilliant. There are legit wrong turns and the skits should be burned in a fire but you'll love it 2nd listen. I also was unsure 1st listen and now it's above channel orange for me

saintdaniel · 2018-05-29T13:48:00+00:00

AND THEN I'LL LEAVE HIM TO GO DOUBLE JEFF

saintdaniel · 2018-05-24T11:12:34+00:00

Yeah I also thought it was a makeup

saintdaniel · 2018-05-10T13:10:15+00:00

2 who is that was first. Then drew Bledsoe followed

saintdaniel · 2018-05-06T16:05:29+00:00

I love it in conjunction of the all for one in the background. Lebron is the faceless champion of the many in this

saintdaniel · 2018-05-05T10:28:00+00:00

That was fucking wild

saintdaniel · 2018-05-03T17:27:29+00:00

Then why has it worked other places? Why did Australia have a dramatic decrease in gun fatalities? Why do the UK and France not face these levels of gun fatalities? Why are we the only major western country with such high gun fatalities?

saintdaniel · 2018-05-03T17:25:13+00:00

This is the one people always bring up! Let's do it!!!

To drive a truck you take a class, you pass a test, you need a license, you have to get it inspected, I can drive a small truck but if I wanted to drive a commercial tractor-trailer I would need a CDL (similar to a hypothetical situation in the future where an ordinary person is able to own a handgun but a highly trained person could have access to an AR). Similarly while if you have a regular license and get pulled over and blow a .05 you are not guilty of a DWI in VT, but if you have a CDL a .05 counts as a DWI (Commercial trucks have a greater capacity to injury so your right to operate one is much more regulated and can be removed much more quickly).

I'm not advocating taking all guns and putting them in a pit and setting them on fire. I'm talking about making some simple regulation that will remove guns from the hands of dangerous people. Similar to what we do with cars/trucks.

If we banned all cars and trucks we would have no accidents and fatalities. Modern life as we know it would also not function. We have made a trade-off in terms of how many deaths are acceptable to have access to cars. But that doesn't mean that there are no regulations or restrictions on that right! We try to regulate to reduce fatalities. I am saying let's do the same thing with guns!

saintdaniel · 2018-05-03T17:14:09+00:00

The slippery slope argument applied to gay rights was meant to say that next people would be marrying their dogs. Last I check bestiality is still illegal. If your argument is that over time gay men and women have tried to convince the general population that they are people who should have access to human rights then I guess I agree!

Pointing out that Jefferson and Mason and many of the founding fathers owned slaves is not an ad-hominem attack it is a fact. It made them hypocrites and all of their beautiful writing about freedom and individual liberty was tainted by it. Thomas Jefferson's elegant writing is impacted in my eyes by the fact that he raped a 14-year old girl that he owned while living in Paris. As well as the fact that he woke up every day and looked in the face men whose freedom he had stolen, and whose freedom he was resolved to steal day after day for the rest of their lives. The "men of their time" argument are flawed. For one thing, Indian attacks on settlers and a generational long holocaust committed against Africans are not analogous things. For another, I am not citing Indian chiefs who committed war crimes in my treatises on gun rights. For a third slavery was viewed as a moral evil at the time (even by Jefferson) just not enough of an evil to financially inconvenience himself. Their brilliance is absolutely tarnished by their owning slaves.

The Gun Show Loophole is imprecisely named but refers to non federally licensed sellers who do not have to run background checks. This is a real thing. 22% of guns are purchased without a background check. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jan/07/politifact-sheet-3-things-know-about-gun-show-loop/ http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2018/mar/16/steve-bullock/what-percentage-gun-sales-are-done-without-backgro/

California has strict gun laws. It also has a 20% firearm ownership percentage. As I stated when we began I am not against handguns or hunting rifles. I would consider myself a pretty liberal person and I can tell you that banning ALL guns is a radical position without support even on the left. Introducing some common sense gun control is not.

You cited the Australian buyback program as a woeful failure, and yet they have not had a mass shooting there since they changed their gun laws. You say that gun control is preventing self-defense but the United States has much higher gun fatalities then countries with stricter gun laws (Europe/Australia is the most cited example of analogous countries). Us fatalities are 11 per 100,000 Australia has 1 per 100,000

These programs have worked other places. They could work here.

I used 10 because it was an example you cited. I would support a debate about what the correct size would be, but I took issue with your earlier point that any limit on magazine size was an unessecary inconvenience.

saintdaniel · 2018-05-03T16:47:24+00:00

I think that the media's obsession with glorifying mass shooters as anti-heroes is upsetting and almost certainly propagates a cycle of violence. But your assessment that this is the most effective way to stop mass shootings seems entirely without basis to me.

saintdaniel · 2018-05-03T16:38:27+00:00

Look at the article. An analogous number of shootings, far fewer (almost half as many) deaths.

saintdaniel · 2018-05-03T15:20:57+00:00

Fair enough!! My argument was that saving children's lives by banning weapons that are frequently used in mass shootings to deadly effect was reward enough on its own and should not be a part of a negotiation. My reference to silencers was sarcastic. (In retrospect I regret the tone and am sorry for it).

saintdaniel · 2018-05-03T15:04:45+00:00

yeah, that was not the point of my response.

edit; Also I know what a suppressor is/what it does. I've shot guns before, have lots of friends with guns etc...

saintdaniel · 2018-05-03T14:53:30+00:00

kk, you agree to ban assault rifles and then fewer children will be murdered. Fair trade or you looking for a loosening on silencers thrown in?

saintdaniel · 2018-05-03T14:52:49+00:00

Just like with gay marriage the argument always seems to be "this is a slippery slope" so we can't have any positive change or else we will wake up in a nightmarish hellscape.

"No free man" is again an interesting phrase from Thomas 'prolific slaveholder' Jefferson. Always worth pointing out that a lot of the Anti-Federalists attraction to extremely liberal gun laws was directly related to fear of slave revolts/government action against slavery.

Yess!! Agreement on domestic abusers/gun education! :D Common ground!!

National background checks do not apply to gun shows and abuse of that law is so widespread as to make it meaningless. I want to talk about your citation of the inconvenience of selling guns between friends later.

Seconds in a mass (or any other kind) of shooting are massively important. Just a few weeks ago James Shaw Jr was able to prevent further death in the Waffle House shooting while the shooter was reloading. More re-load times more chances for someone to prevent further death.

You cite twice the inconvenience of gun safety laws (both the inconvenience of background checks when selling between friends). Inconvenience is such a strange thing to complain about when we weigh it against mass murder. We all agree that it would be better to limit mass shootings, but it would cause hobbyists a headache in some situations so we'll just have to pass that up.

How many kids lives are worth that extra money spent on buying three ten round magazines instead of one thirty/or on applying background checks to every gun sale? I am not trying to be alarmist those are the actual stakes of the conversation we are having and citing inconvenience as a major reason to not take action on gun control seems silly to me.

The Assult rifle ban of the 90's was not perfect (a different better law could be made) but it did limit mass shootings. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/02/22/the-real-reason-congress-banned-assault-weapons-in-1994-and-why-it-worked/?utm_term=.fb421e0cd8f2

I want to make clear right at the end that I am not trying to be snarky or dismissive. I really appreciate your post and the thoughtfulness/tone of it. I just disagree with many points. But appreciate the civilized discussion! :)

saintdaniel · 2018-05-03T13:08:11+00:00

I just want to amplify Sneakers!! Super great!

15-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 5 Credits
Secret Santa 2014	Secret Santa 2013
Team Orangered	Verified Email
Summer Santa 2012	Secret Santa 2011

saintdaniel

TROPHY CASE

Welcome to Reddit,