allknowing

Forum Members
  • Content count

    517
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About allknowing

  • Rank
    Roster Player

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  1. "its just a dog" is a reasonable defense if you accidentally hit one with your car, because we treat animals differently than we do humans whereas if you hit a person for any reason there would be an investigation. the underlying issue is that kicking a tiny dog that poses no threat to you to death shows some type of mental illness and prince clearly needs help. he should, of course, still go to jail and pay his debt to society, but lets not go crazy and say he deserves death for what he did, because people are capable of redemption, and while kicking a dog to death is reprehensible its not as bad as hurting a person, and since as a society we have largely abandoned the eye for an eye basis of law from thousands of years ago making hyperbolic statements like that for a crime we have determined is less severe than hurting other humans is very extreme.
  2. there is nothing inherently poisonous about the food you buy at the supermarket, or the fast food sold by mcdonalds, or the fluoridation of water. there are tons of scientific research devoted to all these topics. the FDA isnt the only group doing research into this stuff. obesity is on the rise because of poor dietary choices and sedentary lifestyles. the main issue with fast food is the high sodium content in the food. its not GMOs or scary chemicals, but people just eating anything and everything they want without putting a modicum of thought into their diet combined with not doing enough physical activity to offset their caloric intake. there isnt anymore to discuss about this really. the information is out there. unlike your information mine is backed by the scientific community so you can believe whatever you want, but this is crazy off topic anyway so i dont want to talk about it anymore.
  3. click the little numbers next to the sentences and then read the sources
  4. in US law they're defined differently. rape is a form of sexual assault, but much more extreme. a sexual assault charge would be for example like inapproriate touching without consent, while rape often involves penetration. ill leave it at that. you can wikipedia the two and its explained much better there.
  5. ive actually been thinking of an idea for how the NFL should handle suspensions for a long time and have been meaning to sit down, really give it some thought, and hash out a decent plan, but ive been putting it off forever so ill just spitball my idea here. the main reason goodell gets in trouble is because theres no hard guidelines for punishments and no internal consistency between them. what i propose is going down every single US law on the books and defining a minimum and maximum for each one with the commissioner getting to pick between the guideline based on severity. as well as each NFL rule you can break IE tampering with footballs and doing the same thing. a rough outline would be this: murder - indefinite suspension rape - indefinite suspension sexual assault - a year to 2 years domestic abuse - a year to 2 years animal cruelty - 6 games to a year drug violations - 4 games to a year etc, etc. go down the list. have a guideline for freaking jaywalking if you have to. then have a list for NFL rules violations like if you're caught with footballs under / over the limit everyone involved gets 2 games. based on initial evidence have it up to the commisioner to then decide if the suspension should kick in immediately, or wait until the person has his day in court and then if the person is found guilty they are suspended. like in this case for example rather than getting to play prince's suspension would kick in immediately because of all the immediate evidence including the lawyer admitting he kicked the dog, the fact its a 7lbs dog, and there's no reasonable way to assume even if he was bitten that his reaction was appropriate. so there is some protection built into the system for people that are falsely accused. this idea is far from perfect theres a million holes in it right now, but its a base for the NFL to add more consistency to punishments, and at least i think its worlds better than what they have right now given that goodell has had scandal after scandal on his plate. but im just some stupid drunk what do i know, but i honestly cant believe the people in the NFL offices making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to advice goodell havent come up with ANYTHING in the last 2-3 years better than whats going for now. maybe collective bargaining screws it all up, and from goodells position i guess he doesnt want to give up absolute power, but having general agreed upon guidelines for literally everything would take a lot of responsibility and potential for screw ups off his plate.
  6. his career isnt over. if he can still play he can be gotten for cheap, and someone will sign him in 2016
  7. yeah the information is out there http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_organism#Controversy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation#Safety http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame#Safety_and_health_effects are you guys conspiracy theorists that believe somehow thousands of scientists from different institutions across different countries are all paid off to come to incorrect conclusions or just luddites
  8. there is no evidence GMOs or preservatives or whatever cause damage to humans. the modern diet is so far beyond what people had even 50 years ago much less hundreds in a nutritional sense that it boggles my mind people are buying into pseudoscience. average life expectancy is going up in every first world country in the world. average height is increasing. obesity and cancer rates increasing are because of sedentary life styles, increased portion sizes, and over eating, as well as improved cancer diagnoses because of technology. its the same reason autism rates are rising. its not caused by vaccines its just we know what autism is now and our ability to diagnose it has improved. why do you think athletes are continuously getting bigger and stronger? its not just steroids. its improved lifting knowledge and the modern diet.
  9. and deer is honestly the worst example to use for people that believe no animals should be killed. unless population density increases so much in areas deer populate that their natural habitats shrink to a point that's almost impossible to conceptionalize right now because its so far in the future then deer will always need to be culled to prevent them from breeding themselves to starvation and to lower the amount of car accidents they cause. might as well eat them if they have to be killed anyway. i see nothing morally wrong with deer hunting although i understand the arguments against other types of hunting.
  10. and im with you to a certain extent. when lab grown meat becomes just as good as animal meat in the next 50-100 years i'd be all for banning the sale of animal meat and the hunting of animals for anything but culling reasons.
  11. it being someone's pet is what makes it different. if a meat company decided to start rounding up strays or breeding dogs to turn them into meat to sell to supermarkets i wouldn't care because it's dogs i'd only care because of how inhumane they are known to treat the animals they slaughter.
  12. no one is responding to how the meat industry treats animals because its widely accepted as inhumane, and most people wish things were different but the meat industry can continuously pump money into congressmen through lobbiests making it very hard for the people to reform the industry.
  13. its not excuses they're reasons based in logic. killing a deer with a baseball bat is illegal and different than killing it with a bullet because there are more and less humane ways to kill something. this isnt hypocritical.
  14. if you went and bought the tags and sat in the woods waiting for a cat or a pack of wild dogs to show up then yeah you can kill them. this dumb hypothetical doesnt exist because the logistics of it make no sense.
  15. no one thinks the way the meat industry treats animals is ok, but to think there's no difference between killing for food and killing for spite, anger, or no reason is some hilariously black and white thinking. and you're not even telling the truth because i guarantee you if two people introduced themselves to you and one said he hunts and the other said he stomped his girlfriends pet dog to death because he was mad at it you'd sure as **** judge them differently.