tdhoosier

Weirdly, the safer my vehicle gets the more my insurance goes up too. The safety probably does a good job of reducing bigger/more dangerous crashes, but if you get in a minor fender bender it is expensive to fix! Think about what’s in your bumpers now - all the radar and tech to trigger that emergency breaking system.

I was introduced to Colin Hay via the Garden State soundtrack (Zach Braff is obviously a fan), which is probably my favorite soundtrack of all time. A must listen. The Shins pretty much owe their career to that movie.

Watched that Hustle movie on Netflix yesterday with Adam Sandler and it was a really good basketball movie. A ton of cameos and even basketball players did some acting. Kenny Smith and Anthony Edwards were not that bad of actors!

It was a sad songs week in my music league. Somebody chose Colin Hay’s - I just Don’t Think I’ll Get Over You. After all this time thinking the song was about a girl, I just learned that he wrote it about his struggle with alcoholism. Takes on a new meaning. …..Still a classic I drink good coffee every morning It comes from a place that's far away And when I'm done I feel like talking Without you here there is less to say Don't want you thinking I'm unhappy What is closer to the truth Is that if I lived till I was a hundred and two I just don't think I'll ever get over you I'm no longer moved to drink strong whiskey I shook the hand of time and I knew that if I lived till I could no longer climb my stairs I just don't think I'll ever get over you Your face it dances and it haunts me your laughter is still ringing in my ears I still find pieces of your presence here even after all these years I don't want you thinking that i don't get asked to dinner cause I'm here to say that I sometimes do and even though I may seem to feel a touch of love I just don't think I'll ever get over you if I live till I was a hundred and two I just don't think I'll ever get over you

While I think the Illini will take a step back this year and while i think that Underwood is not top tier coach, I do think that he is a good coach. He has out performed expectations these last couple of years. I got torn apart last year when I picked them in the second tier and the narrative here was that they'll be nothing without Ayo, they're assistants are gone, they have too much turnover, etc. - they ended up tied for first. I know we love to hate on the Illini (me too), but Underwood has adapted to a defense that's a better fit in this league. And when they played us the first time a scout apparently said something like: "If I knew nothing before walking into this game I would've picked Underwood as the guy who coached in the NBA." The guy is not as bad as some are making him out to be.....all coaches have bad games and bad match-ups in the tournament. He did finish top 2 in the conference in the last two years. Many of us would give our left testicle for that success.

Reading this on the 🚽

I enjoy talking with you, but will admit it gets tiresome because you always try to over trivialize everything and play a game of whataboutism with false equivalencies (i.e. VT, comparing our fatalities to drug torn countries ruled by drug lords, etc.) . Sometimes it's like you're asking me to observe a situation and not use my eyes. So, I'll need to take a break on this. Plus i'm leaving for the weekend. That said, I don't think you'll negate the threat all together with that idea, being that most school shootings are committed by students from that school....students who can get into the school without raising red flags. And then you have concert venues, movie theaters, churches, etc. which are also soft targets preyed on by these cowardly assholes. Again, your idea sounds great to me. But I think it's a pipe dream that it will completely stop school shootings. But, we are getting lost in the weeds. To the point that i keep reiterating: all solutions need to be on the table. But you seem to keep taking talk of any type of gun control off the table even though the constant amongst the most fatal tragedies (except one...Virginia Tech) is that they were committed with some sort of AR-15 style gun. Is there really no reason why this isn't the weapon of choice? If so , why aren't they using any other weapon? I mean, do we send our soldiers into war with six shooters? No. Because they aren't as efficient or as deadly. Efficient and powerful guns that hold a lot of highly lethal rounds, easily accessed by mentally unhealthy individuals, entering soft targets does not make for a good situation. I see 3 problems in that last statement (guns, mental health, soft targets). You seem to be telling me that you only see 2. If that's the case then we'll just have to agree to disagree because the back and forth is not doing any good.

I was just using your argument that a motivated criminal will find a way. A motivated criminal would also find their way into the school. Point being nothing is a 100% deterrent. We are looking at ways to minimize and reduce.

I never said it will stop. I said it would reduce the damage inflicted. And because making it stop is a tremendous challenge, and overall unlikely, minimizing the damage is the next best option. I’m all for making schools more secure, but to use your argument: this will apparently stop mass shootings??????? A motivated criminal could find a way to duplicate a key card and get into the school undetected. Because of this hypothetical scenario should we throw the idea of making schools more secure out the window??? That rationale is silly. In all seriousness, I am for making schools more secure if it will reduce the damage. So, it’s an option we need to look into - I am 100% behind this recommendation. I’m also for better access to mental health. For some reason you keep looking at this like an all or nothing scenario only when it comes to guns. "If some measure of control won't 100% stop the problem, then we can't consider it". Yet, you don't apply this same standard to the other recommendation you make (securing schools, mental health, etc.), which also aren’t 100% preventative.

But you will. And you keep on using VT as an example, but that was an outlier as far as school shootings go. You're telling me not having access to an AR-15 (or weapons like it) wouldn't have made a difference to the death count in columbine, Sandy Hook, Parkland, San Bernardino, etc.? Because that's your one life saved right there.

I think this is the crutch of what @5fouls is saying. 10 deaths is better than 20, and in most cases that might be the difference of using a hard gun vs. an AR-15. 10 deaths is still horrible, but that's 10 more kid's who are still around to hug their parents. I'm not saying there is a right answer to this, but hypothetically is 10 lives enough to give up your right to an AR-15? Is one-hundred? Is one-thousand? Is there even a number that would make you consider this? For me the answer is 1. But I don't care about guns. I don't have one. I don't want one. It's easy for me to say that because I'm not giving up anything. I think AR-15s cause way more trouble than prevent trouble in this country. I haven't been is a situation where I needed any gun. I do not know one person who has been in a situation where they needed a gun. But that's me and that's my experiences. Maybe I'm lucky. Maybe all my friends and family are lucky. I don't know. Perhaps this is where the disconnect is - people experiences, fears, principles, level of trust/distrust etc. are different.

Because every state has a different way of enforcing straw purchases. Many of those guns come from the same stores but the CPD’s jurisdiction ends at the Chicago line. There is no true ‘gun control’ if states have different laws. Point being is that restrictions would need to happen at the federal level to have an effect.

How many guns confiscated from crimes come from within the city limits of Chicago? The answer is zero because there are zero stores that sell guns in the city. So, I'm not sure how you come to this conclusion. The problem with Chicago is not the strict gun laws, it's the flow of illegal weapons that come in from outside the city limits and outside the state of Illinois. Out of the 36,000 illegal guns seized by the CPD, an estimated 60% of them come from out of state - mainly Indiana, Mississippi and Wisconsin.

I think our forefather foresaw that their laws would not always be applicable in the future, which is why they allow amendments to the constitution. I believe that the constitution is a living and breathing document because of this. I don't give 2 shits about what our forefathers would have thought about a thought that they could not conceive at the time they wrote the constitution. Re-read that last sentence and and think about how dumb this is. What would they have thought about the 2nd amendment now???? Who cares!? Asking this is a pointless exercise. What they did think is that we can can be big boys and girls and amend the document as needed. That much we know.

To flip this around. What are the chances you need an AR-15 to fend off a tyranical government coming to get you? What are the chances you need an AR-15 to fend off an armed intruder? What are the chances you need an AR-15 to fend off looters? This is the least effective gun ever, we might as well just get rid of it then. 😎

Every country has mental health issues, but they do not have close to the number of mass shooting as we do. Yes, we need to work on mental health, but since we are pondering this, what has congress done to make access to mental health support easier since columbine? Mental health is nothing more than an empty promise and a talking point used after a mass shooting to deflect the fact that congress is dysfunctional. @IUFLA, my frustration is not pointed at you because mental health is a problem. It’s at every politician who goes on TV and all of the sudden remembers that mental health is a problem in the US only after a mass shooting. The ones who act like they can waive it away with a magic wand and this will, all of the sudden, stop mass shootings. The ones who have not done a single thing to address mental health since the last mass shooting. Unfortunately due to our culture of sensationalism, troubled people know how to inflict the most damage and the most hurt in the most sensationalistic way. Mass shootings are the way to do it. You’ve hear ‘the drug of choice’ - this is the ‘tragedy of choice’ for the horribly disturbed and cowardly. Whether this is mental health, a breakdown of the family structure, violent video games……you name it. These people, this problem, will not go away any time soon. There will always be people with the urge to inflict this kind of hurt. There are in other countries too. The difference is that we have easy access to the tools that allow them to inflict this amount of hurt, in such high numbers.

I believe that polls say 90% of Americans agree on UBC’s. So……congress???? It’s been more than 20 years since Columbine. I think its very disturbing when even bipartisan legislation can’t get through congress.

What was the 3rd one?

I definitely get where you are coming from. The cryptic tweets in reply to the interview insinuate there is more to the story…..which is why it may have been better left unsaid.

🤔

I was going to bring up that if JG has any chance at sniffing the NBA it's going to be as a 3 because he can develop, but he can't grow past 6'6" (on demand). Yes, you can talk about Draymond Green all you want, but he's a complete anomaly at that position, in a unique system. My point above about reading between the lines is that we need depth at the 3 and have more than enough at the 4. JG ultimately wants to be a 3. He didn't transfer to a place who could offer him minutes at the 3 spot. He stayed because the staff is willing to work with his to get him where he wants to be. Look, based on what I saw last season, I completely agree with KOB, Bgleas and BtownQB - he didn't look like a 3 to me either. But there's only so much I see and there's only so much I know. IF the coaches are saying something different, then I'm going to change my mind. I guess, it's simple as that. If you listen to the rest of Kenya's answer on the interview, he does explain why they expect JG to make that leap.

51 minute mark. ”One of the things coach talked about with Geronimo after the season is trying to move him towards the perimeter and trying to play the 3 spot.”

Hopefully I was remembering the Hoosier Hysterics interviews accurately - that's where I heard it. In context and the impression that I got is that they definitely want him working on his perimeter skills so he can play on the wing next season. I agree with some of you that based on last year's play I don't see him at the 3 either because of defense and ball handling. But I'm not the coach. The narrative the coaches are putting out there is that he's not fully developed because he hasn't been playing basketball long - he's still very green. Combine that with the fact that he's had 3 or 4 coaches in the last 4 years - all with different systems. Maybe that explains him getting lost on the perimeter. Maybe that explains the bad reaching fouls. I don't know. Apparently though, they believe he has the athleticism to make that transition. Reading in between the lines: we signed Reneau and JG didn't transfer. I think that in itself says a lot.

I agree that JG does not look like a 3. That said, both Woody and Kenya have said in interviews that they are preparing Geronimo for the 3 next season. I think this should pretty much end the Geronimo 3/4 debate. Whether or not he'll be successful is another debate.

the Hoosier Hysterics guys interviewed TJD over the weekend. A few interesting tidbits… - During his slump last season his back was hurting him very badly - he was playing in pain, couldn’t move as quick or jump as high until later in February. And before the first Purdue game he was up all night PUking (pun intended) 🤮 - It was his and Race’s decision to suspended the guys for the NW game. 😯 - He said he is going to come out next season shooting. Especially in the early games to get his confidence up. 🤞