Neo

To Sir XB: Not sure what Cruz said. I don't follow him closely. I think the ballot box and free press are defenses against bad government. I think Cruz (words in someone else's mouth warning) references a defense against tyranny. He shares the framers' language. Just a comment, and not a contradiction. To all: Much is said about the second amendment, militias and gun control. This is true here and elsewhere. Our news, our circumstances, our world, our humanity all scream this is a priority discussion. I love having it here, with each of you. There was a time, in my early posting naivety, where I thought I could simply point things out in our common history and the argument would settle. The things I had in mind, because I'm humble, weren't my conclusions. Instead, I pointed to the facts, history, writings and court rulings of those who formed the country. I persuaded no one. I was wrong about the first step's compelling nature. I point. You point. No one changes. Ah, life. The thing that saddens me is that we can have a meaningful discussion of where to take ourselves only if we agree upon where we're currently standing. This disagreement prevents a common path forward. Again, ah life. I want to live in a world without gun violence. So do each of you, as far as I can tell. Some years(?) ago I offered links to the US Constitution, its words, contemporary State constitutional draftings, and the letters and writings of the framers before, during and after 1989. I have no idea who read web goofball Neo's posts or followed his links. Hubris - I thought my work was done! I've since seen, time after time, references to the bastardization of the amendment's meaning. I see the word militia used in a way that excludes the individual. With the ultimate well earned respect, I hope no one thinks I'm calling you out individually. I'm not. I googled, today. I chose benign googles, with no bias in the search words. No "crazy ass liberal gun control" searches. No "insightful patriot gun control" searches. I googled things like "2nd amendment framers intent" and "2nd amendment militia". I'll provide links. Being right is fun. I enjoy it. Being corrected is just as fun. I enjoy it, too. Affirming or changing my view would bring a thrill. I truly want to learn. I have five links. Duke, Cornell, Jefferson, The New York Times, The Tenth Amendment Center. You'll see Heller, the current law of the land. You'll see Jefferson, no militia member, carrying pistols. You'll read that each amendment addresses an individual right. Self defense, the consideration by states to require citizens to own guns, all appear. You'll also read about the notion of a "collective" right (capital M Militia) arising in legislatures long after the Constitution was written, with courts subsequently endorsing this legislative concept before rejecting it. This last concept, collective, is the myth, the bastardization. Madison and Jefferson and their peers believed I could own and bear arms. Me, alone. I don't need to belong to a militia. Militia, in their minds, was a purpose. It's A purpose, not THE purpose, and certainly not the sole purpose. Now, you've all taught me something. I've called this right inalienable. It's not. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are. Bearing arms is a right that is subject to limitation. Jefferson, and others, talk about this. I hope I've said "I agree" often enough. I agree with Jefferson! Hubris, once again. I agree with Rodin, Shakespeare and Mozart. I'm sure they're proud they have my approval. Better said, I understand their genius. Duke: http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3830&context=lcp Cornell: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html Jefferson: http://eyler.freeservers.com/JeffPers/jefpco06.htm Tenth Amendment Center: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2014/09/22/2nd-amendment-original-meaning-and-purpose/ New York Times (contrary conclusion and the only Op Ed piece): http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/27/opinion/nocera-right-to-bear-arms-means-this.html?_r=0 I can talk about how we eliminate slaughter. I'm just not able to when we dismiss the important first step as not necessary. Orthodoxy makes me squirm. Confession: I hear orthodoxy in the assertion, sans evidence, of mythical meanings and collective militias. If enough of us assert it, it's true. I am a human being. Perhaps my ears hear incorrectly. I've yet to see anything other than a one, two or three sentence assertion regarding militias and collective rights. I would be grateful for a scholarly article or link to the framers and a collective right limited to organized militias and denied to individuals. If you google that, by the way, you'll get dozens of web pages saying it'd be a good idea and dozens more saying the language isn't explicit enough to rule this conclusion out. I've found none saying this limited view was what was intended. That leaves me with repeal. Have at that debate. Edit - found something. Justice John Paul Stevens comes close, opining that the absolute individual right to bear arms isn't codified in the Constitution. He, however, suggests a Constiturional change, or Amendment, to address this. He doesn't dismiss as mythical or bastardized. He's a half step closer to me. I'm looking!

Mr. Dom: I don't know the NRA's position on background checks and mental health screenings. I'm just not close to the NRA. To the extent that it's a lobbying organization, I suspect it opposes both. My experience is that lobbying groups stake their positions close to the extreme end of the debate continuum fearing slippery slopes. (As an aside, I believe slippery slopes exist even when I'm willing to accept a view in the middle. When I was a kid, we didn't wear seatbelts in cars. My kids had to wear helmets riding bicycles. Some day, someone will discover that climbing trees is dangerous and run for office.) I believe it's far too easy to get a gun and a concealed carry permit. I'll go further. I know it is. I don't use the word "know" very often. Several years ago, intellectually curious during public debate, I put myself through the process. Without saying whether I followed the process to conclusion or not, I'm confident I understand its entirety. I know I do. It's harder to get an initial driver's license than a CCP and handgun where I live. I support background checks for criminality, waiting periods, and serious training and competency exams. There should be no gun show exclusions. I see no meaningful second amendment infringement with these measures and I read the amendment as broadly as the framers did. I do not support government registries, data bases, or the involvement of family physicians. That's not a slippery slope, it's a greased cliff. Here's the kicker. I don't think any of the measures I listed above would have an affect on the gun violence we often discuss here. The measures I support, and the ones I believe go too far, would apply to responsible gun owners. Perhaps safety and competence training may result in fewer accidental deaths. Passion crimes might be avoided with waiting periods. However, did I list anything that would've prevented Columbine or Sandy Hook? Don't get me started on gun free zones. I'll bet the San Bernadino facility was a gun free zone. Windmill tilting feel good folly. If you want to prevent gun violence, look to family structure, economics and mental health treatment. If that's too difficult, melt guns, ban their manufacture and import, and repeal the second amendment. I choose the first path. In the meantime, people will kill. My heart is huge if my words are terse. I cry, but I am grateful for an inalienable right and cognizant of the ineffectiveness of half measures. That leaves only the heavy lifting in this paragraph's first sentence. Choose and Vote!

Second Amendment guy, here. I agree.

O'Reilly looks gassed ... OT and shootout.

I'd like to see the benches switched for OT. I'd like to see Reinhart, too

Seemed every one timer was in the feet.

Speed kills.

Detroit's fifth straight OT, and seventh in eight games.

I'm wondering if you give Eichel a couple of days off. Maybe a game or two. He's nearing 30 games, with preseason, in 10 weeks or so. This has to be a brutal transition for a 19 year old.

Just heard an interesting stat on the Detroit feed. They were talking about Andelkadar's Gordie Howe Hat Trick. Gordie Howe had TWO GHHTs in his entire career. Who knew ...

1-2-3-4 ..... We want 5!

Antics!

Weak on the point, there.

Poo la Poo Joo Jarvi? Jar Jar Rinks?

^Whiskey *snip* I like this post. I am a U.S. citizen. I have the right to bear arms. So does every U.S. citizen of any demographic. I can choose whether or not to exercise this right. Same as, etc., etc. I'm concerned about nearly all societal problems. Poverty, unemployment, underemployment, and dirty water among them. I have a citizen's responsibility to them all. Two paragraphs; rights and responsibilities. I'm 54 and white. I have no greater, or lesser, responsibility to solve problems than anyone else, gun problems included. I'll gladly share the burden with you all. The right to free speech, to due process, to bear arms, and to the free exercise of religion, among other things, are all of ours. Oh, and we don't have to quarter troops! I'm not exactly sure what the specifics of the "gun demographic" are. I do know the demographics of the second amendment crowd. It's each of us. We all have a right, to guard or surrender, and a choice to make freely. Same skin, same game. No more, and no less, responsibility exists for any one of us. I brush nothing off and don't know anyone who does. Once again we're confusing the object with the right, the behavior, and the underlying myriad causes. Now, to join the narrative (no disrespect). Let's say we middle aged white guys did have more skin in the game than any other demographic with regard to a constitutional right. We don't, but I'll play along. If I stepped up to the plate, the solutions I'd provide wouldn't involve guns at all. The solutions would address the social and economic behaviors that lead to lives more lkely to spiral into crime and poverty. I'll not bore anyone here. Hint: Wanna produce a generation of Americans less likely to be impoverished, desperate and violent? Don't have kids until you're married. Stay married. Have no more kids than you can afford. Make sure the kids stay in school and graduate. "But Neo, that's not realistic to expect". If it isn't, then deal with the consequences of economic trajectory, desperation, crime and violence. At the end of that path, you'll find a gun to point to and blame. I don't think what I point out is unrealistic. We can debate that, though. Disagree? Your turn, you're up. What we can't debate is the consequences of not recognizing successful habits and accountability. Four hundred and fifty murders, YTD, in Chicago. I saw only one, alleged, on TV. A white cop shot a black kid. Let's send Chicago more money for programs and make more gun free zones. Black lives matter! Say it! If only the climate summit had taken place earlier.

^. I've seen that video, of course. I always wondered if it's more embarrassing to be throwing slaps, or receiving slaps.

To GoDD and all: I posted earlier as a new SabreSpacer about the general transition from youth to adulthood. Christmas is still glorious even though I know the bite in the cookie is mine and the carrots are back in the fridge. I don't recall the year the feeling changed. I do recall my hockey feeling changing on December 2, 1981. I was twenty, a man-child, and Danny Gare and Jim Schoenfeld were Red Wings. My love of hockey didn't change. My understanding of what hockey actually is did change. I still appreciated the skill and excitement. I still appreciated the menace and passion play of the game within the game. Over time, skill increased and menace decreased. The tank team Sabres would beat the 1975 Sabres 6 to 0. I understood this, but missed the passion play for years. Sabres v Annaheim, ok. Playfair v O'Reilly, YES! During the last few years, and with the remarkable influence of posters here, I've come to miss fighting less and appreciate skill more. I love what I understand better. To GoDD, specifically, I can say that I'm not trying to recapture youth as much as I'm enjoying the memories a different time in my life gave me. My values are different. Both times are beautiful. Regarding skill and to the learned - we've all seen YouTube video of an NHL star skating and tic tacking through a face off circle with thirty pucks strewn about. His skates and stick never touch an obstacle puck. Tic, tack, forward, back. Remarkable. Is it just me, or do you have a hard time seeing a Perreault, a Lafleur, or a Dionne doing this? Awesome. I carried my skates on my stick (Titan) into the woods to a place called The Pits, in Blasdell, to clear a frozen pond. Norman Rockwell looked on.

WJAG and Potato .. good call earlier.

Just got back from Thanksgiving journey. Thank you all. BagBoy ... Nothing trite at all. I'd love to. I have to start smaller, though. Training Wheels! Hoss, bingo ..... nfreeman. I'll start with your gracious links.

Request - Is anyone aware of a concise write up addressing the debate or conversation around what Islam is, its true teachings, terror, jihad, etc.? I am looking to inform myself. Book, pamphlet, web article? I ordered a book on Amazon. I have a general construct around "true" vs. "perverted". The polarized views are so divergent. I'd like to go to the sources. I am not a scholar, generally, and not a religious scholar, specifically. I do have an appetite for knowledge. Grateful in advance ...

Not sure if you're tongue in cheek ... Imagine the uproar had someone said, after Paris: "Well, he's a 22 year old Arab. So that should surprise no one". Language ... Now, I'm a 54 year old white guy. I'm not offended in the least. We live in a world, though, where slights real and imagined control our language. It dumbs down debate and strangles ideas. See: most recent micro aggression, trigger word, safe space, entitled bed wetter event on the college campus of your choice. Finally, my opportunity. I'm giddy with narcissistic outrage and a lack of context. I'm thrilled to be the victim du jour. Here goes ... "I am a 54 year old white male who feels unsafe as a result of The Poster's categorization of all of us as shooters. Ageist! Racist! I have a list of demands, starting with the resignation of all mods. Joke or not, I'm uncomfortable. Middle aged white lives matter. SAY IT!" Absurdity ... PS .... ALL of my outrage is fabricated, lest a wrong intention be construed. PSS ... I left profiling off of my list of indignant accusations. Sorry, I'm not good at feeling aggrieved.

^. I was not a fan of Trump's from day one as a potential leader. I was shocked and then disgusted by his degradation of people - illegal (undocumented, choose your word) aliens, McCain and POW's, Megan Kelly and now those with disabilities. It's way too old school ignorance to explain away as plain talking and brash. Worst of all is the character revealing lack of accountability as he backs away from each ugly trespass. McCain, Megan Kelly, aliens, and now the disabled. He was unfit to lead. He's now a terrible person.

Happy Thanksgiving to you all. I am grateful for my Creator, His gifts to me, and a family I love. I am grateful for a world that overwhelms me with beauty every single minute of the day. To my friends here. I am grateful I found you while seeking the narrowest of interests, our Sabres, only to discover the fullest of human beings and the broadest of interests. Travel safe, if that's your plan. I am thirty minutes away from a mini van trip to Charlotte, NC, where our family is gathering for the Holiday.

Great D Lo shift.

You own "Sam will be fine". In my view, you can change it to "Sam is fine" with no argument from me. Draisaitl is a pleasant surprise. Agreeing with TBPhD, above, I recall a variety of sources cautioning that a big frame moving slowly might dominate at one level, but not the next. I watched him in a few junior tournaments and chose Reinhart as my vote. I'm happy for Draisaitl and Edmonton. Sam's subtle game will blossom, as well. Frankly, it has.