HopefulFuture

:) Is this Flynns first game?

I want them to win this one.

Actually, it's not impossible to find said middle ground. While conversation on both the gun and illegal immigration subject matters, it was never my intention to inform an already well informed membership such as Sabrespace, nor was it my intention to sway anyone individual to my point of view. We each, as individual citizens, must decide whether we are loyal to and uphold the Constitution of the United States of America or not. In that document, the 1st 10 Amendments are considered a "Bill of Rights" and as such, are beyond reproach with regards to alterations at the expense of the rights of citizens. With regards to immigration, although the nation was built primarily on immigration waves from all over the world, there can be little to no doubt that the nation does have an effective process in place to legally become a citizen that works. Illegal immigration is also addressed in those said policies. Not following the rule of law is not what loyal citizens who uphold the document with which we live under should want to see, ever. This burden is carried by each of us, through the electoral process, which is currently under direct threat from the immigration scenario being played out in the nation today, and, with that, a direct threat to the Constitution of the United States of America and the very loyalty through abiding by the law of legal citizens. Carry that burden each of us must, determine which side of that threat each of us is on, because quite frankly, millions and I mean millions, of individuals who have sworn an oath to that document or pledged allegiance to this nation will not go quietly in to that good night on this issue. Defense of the nation, it's that simple, the one binding mechanism of all these different cultures that make up this great nation is the Constitution, currently, it's under assault, I will do everything in my power to defend it from Liberals who clearly want to tear it apart and attempt to build a Utopian society that enslaves us all to their mind set.

I do read the other threads ya know :P

Laugh all you like, I'm completely comfortable with my self in my realistic views and stands in all issues, since I live by common sense. Snork or not, you'll find me a worthy ally as well as a worthy opponent in any given set of circumstances.

lol, I'm never "herded". Look back at each of my posts, I stand my ground regardless. I have conceded nothing while attempting to reach a middle ground on the views of subjects. For example, take the gun conversation, never once has anyone seen me state directly that states do not have the right to regulate fire arms. Surprisingly, no one asked me on this because the conversation always retained itself to the Federal level, which is where my stance hardens like a rock. The 2nd Amendment is in the Federal Constitution, not in the states. There for, it is common sense that all states adhere to Federal Constitutional laws, and indeed, all are forced to via the very structure we have setup as an all encompassing governing body.

Handguns were not initially designed for concealment, they were carried openly about the waste initially. They were designed as a close range weapon, secondary to the rifle. But it's not a form of stubbornness, it's a very real connection. If you disagree with that connection, fine, that only reinforces my view of the situation when it comes to discussing matters such as this, at least, for myself. Just as it would with anyone on the opposite side of the equation. In order for me to digest where an individuals or groups mind set is at with regard to subject matter, it's more than reasonable to utilize examples that can be used in comparison for such conversations.

Completely agree. I think we have found our middle ground here GCOE. I, as a 2nd amendment advocate, am not opposed to state laws on fire arms that do not hinder the ability of law abiding citizens to own them, as long as the government at the federal level isn't in the position to have that knowledge. After all, the real concerns of gun owners is at the Federal level, not at the state level, and, when you leave a state with a fire arm that must be registered and you must have a license for, as I can attest to personally, you have to submit that information to the state you are going to. So, there is a system in place whereby citizens can successfully move about freely while not hindering their 2nd amendment rights. Like I said, I think you and I are starting to see more eye to eye on where each other stands. And there is room for reasonable checks and balances to be put in place all the while not hindering 2nd amendment rights. As for those gun tragedies that do occur, such as school shootings and other high venue media covering events, clearly I do not know the individuals involved, but the mental aspect is the only loophole I see that can slip through the cracks. After all, how does one know if one is mentally unstable if the individual that is hides it effectively from all parties around him or her? That is a tough one GCOE, and the only one I wrestle with when it comes to my thoughts on this. I don't have an answer, and honestly, I doubt anyone does.

Good questions and it's the states laws that provide the atmosphere for concealment by forcing it on the public via legislation. Ask any gun owner and 9 out of 10 would rather open carry. It's the deterrent affect. But, I give you this, that is something I've asked since I was a kid, why do states pass laws that force you to have a concealed weapon? If you look at state by state, only 3 have open carry laws, Utah, Arizona and Texas, but, even in Texas, you have to have a license, in Utah, no, Arizona, I'm not sure, I'd have to look it up, but open carry is there.

While this is true, and I'm fully aware your not posting to add to my posts, I'm not so concerned with the variants of these tools in so much as I am on the mind set of the human beings who have called out or singled out if you will, guns, as opposed to far more reaching killing tools in the nation.

Negative, wrong answer. The number #1 reason for guns as a tool is self defense, not offensive in capacity, the #2 reason, which used to be #1 is what is known as the hunter/gatherer dichotomy of the human experience. As for weapons of various sizes, purposes, as I stated early on, there can be reasonable checks and balances installed in the process, much like a vehicle, such as licensed operation, and indeed, there is in many states. But that is not the point of my post, it's to see where these individuals that are so anti gun are when there is so much tragedy via vehicular deaths. And once again, I'm merely pointing to the human state of mind in civilization, at least, here in the states, when it comes to such matters.

Oh, that's right, we are being detailed specific, I'll resubmit stating the #1 cause of deaths by a tool. There, that should make you happy and not deflect any further from the discussion.

http://www.examiner.com/article/mother-of-cop-killed-by-illegal-obama-ignoring-us-completely Why is the President, a Democrat, completely ignoring American Citizens who have been directly affected by the illegal immigration situation in the nation? Could it be because he's a good Democrat soldier and realizes that these people will tilt the balance of the electoral process in this nation toward his friends and the party he belongs to? What about those that are affected by individuals that are "REPEAT OFFENDERS"? And that's what illegal immigrants are, they broke a law by illegal entry in to the nation, so any law they break afterwards while here puts them squarely in that status. In the end, a liberal will always defend a cause with out true loyalty to the nation nor care for it's affects on citizens, and that is being played out in the Democratic party as we speak. Why? What's your reasoning? A gun is a tool, a vehicle is a tool, what's the basis for your thought process on why they cannot be compared?

The #1 killer in the nation has benefits? Do tell, I'm all ears.

I'm waiting for the anti gun posters on here to speak up about the massive amounts of vehicular deaths in this nation, and I fully expect those posters to call for a full vehicle ban in the nation, or, is their hipocrisy such that they just can't fathom a more dangerous tool than a gun. Are they blinded to the #1 killer in the nation, or is their agenda more political oriented simply because the GOP supports the 2nd Amendment? http://www.cnn.com/2....html?hpt=hp_t1 Here is some interesting information on Gun vs Vehicular deaths in America: http://www.motherjon...-traffic-deaths So once again, where are these individuals who claim that gun deaths are the root of all evil? Guns are a tool, vehicles are a tool, why the overwhelming silence on vehicular deaths? Why no call for a vehicle ban? I suspect there is no call because many of these individuals use vehicles, and they justify using them by telling themselves and others that they are responsible drivers, there for, how can they even be considered in the same category as other individuals who aren't. I further suspect they tell themselves that vehicles are a tool for good, supporting families by getting them to and from work, school and picking up the kids from school to be safe. They may even go so far as to really believe what they are telling themselves.

I don't believe Kaleta will be anything special coming back. He's a local product, and we should support him based upon that. He's living his dream, there is no harm in each of us living it through him by supporting him for this season. Will he turn us around? No Is it something that we, as fans, will be interested in, meaning his come back story line?, Yes Let's just have fun this season with what little we can. It couldn't do any harm, and I don't see Patrick Kaleta as a long term member of this team unless his transformation is complete to the new NHL philosophy on his style of play.

I don't know anything about Setoguchi, what's his upside, besides the fact he's not Drew Stafford?

Right decision. Let the kid develop physically some more. We have time, he has time, no one is in a hurry here.

You think that experiment is over now? And if so, he sits in the press box as a cap filler situation until the end of the season? God I hope so, because he sucks.

lol, Tank.............just priceless.................. (you could have said coffee to) :P

Disappointed in the lose, but I'm content in knowing that the team actually put some effort in to a game. Once again, Stafford and Ennis, but, a nice pass by Mitchell to Ennis on that goal. Wish Myers would put himself in position to shoot more, he's got a hell of a shot.

This

Same here LabattBlue. The only d man that stuck out to me was Ruhwedel, his passing out of the zone is so crisp. He's definitely got the knack for landing tape to taper's as the rush transitions across the neutral zone and up ice.

I've only physically seen them this past game, but honestly 11, they did look like they were comfortable with each other. The only knock I have that line is that they did squander 3 or 4 decent opportunities by not hanging on to the puck. There was one time in the 2nd period where Armia had it along the boards and it looked like he gave up on the battle to back away, Carrier got there to help him late and the puck was already going back the other way, if Armia continues that battle, maybe Carrier gets that puck and Grigs is by the net almost unhindered waiting for it. I saw similar events in the neutral zone with that line, not really a concern as they are still jelling together, but I'm hoping they get better at supporting one another once in the offensive zone.

Went last nite. They looked more than just chemistry. There was some very good passing and play setups between not only Grigs and Armia, but the work by Carrier to allow these 2 to free wheel caught my eye in each of the 3 periods. I like this kid Carrier, fast and not one bit afraid to get in to the dirty areas along the boards and behind the net. He was solid as a winger for Grigs and Armia.