PDA

View Full Version : Lakers suck


SoopaSooner
12-09-2012, 09:58 PM
Even with Nash and Gasol I don't see their defense getting much better. They are going to have to make a trade. Gasol probably being the old man out.

playmakr
12-09-2012, 10:16 PM
They will have to become an above average road team just to make the playoffs.

They have tons of road games left.

NickZepp
12-09-2012, 10:54 PM
Lakers are basically the same yeam last year, but a little older.

playmakr
12-10-2012, 12:34 AM
Lakers are basically the same yeam last year, but a little older.
And a lot worse at the FT line.

bocabull
12-10-2012, 10:45 AM
Talk to us in March. The Lakers are implementing a point guard centric offense with no point guard. They're losing games by single digits shooting in the mid to low 40% range.

There is nobody on this team right now to get people the ball in their spots. When Nash comes back that shooting % jumps to the 50% range like his offenses always have and those single digit Ls turn into Ws.

''They did it to themselves,'' Millsap said of the 9-12 Lakers. ''Our defense was pretty good, but they had no ball movement and that made it easier on us just to try to load up, keep them out of the paint and let them fire up some 3s.''

SilliSooner
12-10-2012, 11:13 AM
Talk to us in March. The Lakers are implementing a point guard centric offense with no point guard. They're losing games by single digits shooting in the mid to low 40% range.

There is nobody on this team right now to get people the ball in their spots. When Nash comes back that shooting % jumps to the 50% range like his offenses always have and those single digit Ls turn into Ws.

''They did it to themselves,'' Millsap said of the 9-12 Lakers. ''Our defense was pretty good, but they had no ball movement and that made it easier on us just to try to load up, keep them out of the paint and let them fire up some 3s.''

I agree, that by playoff time they'll be a very tough team. The problem will be that by then Kobe will have logged so many minutes carrying the load, he'll have no legs left.

Their bench, which used to have some reliables, notably Lamar Odom, has no one to give them scoring.

SoopaSooner
12-10-2012, 11:17 AM
So the plan is to outscore everybody? That didn't work with the Suns and won't work in LA. Their defense is BAD. Any guard worth his salt has abused them. They gave up 54 points in the pant just last night.

bocabull
12-10-2012, 11:19 AM
The hope is that once the offense gets cooking they will build some nice leads to rest Kobe and have him fresh for the final 5 minutes. You're correct at his current pace the odds of him wearing down are high.

bocabull
12-10-2012, 11:42 AM
So the plan is to outscore everybody? That didn't work with the Suns and won't work in LA. Their defense is BAD. Any guard worth his salt has abused them. They gave up 54 points in the pant just last night.

Well obviously every team that has won a title in basketball history had a plan to outscore the other team. There have been many successful formulas to accomplish this goal.

Lakers formula is to get FG% around 50% which will decrease the number of easy buckets they allow on the defensive end. We have no idea how successful it will be until Nash comes back.

Let's not kid ourselves that a team with Kobe, World Peace & Howard is completely incapable of playing defense.

KCRuf/Nek
12-10-2012, 05:16 PM
Even with Nash and Gasol I don't see their defense getting much better. They are going to have to make a trade. Gasol probably being the old man out.

Well those two certainly aren't going to ramp up the defense.

SoopaSooner
12-10-2012, 07:36 PM
Well obviously every team that has won a title in basketball history had a plan to outscore the other team. There have been many successful formulas to accomplish this goal.

Lakers formula is to get FG% around 50% which will decrease the number of easy buckets they allow on the defensive end. We have no idea how successful it will be until Nash comes back.

Let's not kid ourselves that a team with Kobe, World Peace & Howard is completely incapable of playing defense.

Kobe and MWP are not the defenders they once were.

jmizzy4ou
12-11-2012, 07:24 PM
Talk to us in March. The Lakers are implementing a point guard centric offense with no point guard. They're losing games by single digits shooting in the mid to low 40% range.

There is nobody on this team right now to get people the ball in their spots. When Nash comes back that shooting % jumps to the 50% range like his offenses always have and those single digit Ls turn into Ws.

''They did it to themselves,'' Millsap said of the 9-12 Lakers. ''Our defense was pretty good, but they had no ball movement and that made it easier on us just to try to load up, keep them out of the paint and let them fire up some 3s.''


As the resident Laker optimist, I wish I shared your confidence Boca. :D:D

Just not seeing it. I believe the offense will be more efficient with Nash because right now they are struggling to score points. Nash will provide many more easy points, IMO.

The defensive issues are too great to overcome, IMO. Rival PG's are shredding the defense, because LA has no one to keep them from penetrating. Nash/Blake won't remedy that. What I see from watching LA most every night is D-12 is drawn constantly to help a beaten defender. When he slides to contest the shot, no one rotates on the back line, and you get layup after layup, or open jumpers on the kick out.

The only solution I see is to ship Gasol and get at least 2 athletic wingmen, or blow the entire thing up and decide who you build around. I just don't see LA being much more than a playoff team with an early exit.

As someone else said, Artest & Kobe aren't the defenders they once were....

On a footnote, thew bench hasn't been bad at all. Both Meeks & Hill have proven to me they can help this squad. Jamison is still who he has always been. Potent scorer, but liability everywhere else....

playmakr
12-11-2012, 07:30 PM
Lakers lose in Cleveland.

jmizzy4ou
12-11-2012, 07:57 PM
Lakers lose in Cleveland.

WOw!!!! Just watched the Presser with D'Antoni. Let me just say if Stoops had to face the LA media, he would probably choke someone. :D:D

The coach was asked some tough questions, and things got very heated. Someone asked him if he ever gets concerned when the ball starts in Kobe's hands, and ends in Kobe's hands, without anyone else touching it. He responded, "we do need to look at that, and make some adjustments there". The same reporter not backing off, asked, " is everyone besides Kobe not good enough"? Did you guys bring in Howard to watch Kobe shoot? The coach responded we need to get a better flow, with more people involved.....

He went on to add alot of coach speak about Nash coming back, etc.... At the end some reporter asked why the Lakers don't practice defense?? D'Antoni blew a gasket and accused the guy of lying on the team. The guy said you guys were on the court for almost an hour yesterday morning, and you didn't practice defense at all. D'Antoni then asked the guy, were you there?? I didn't see you in our film room. He then went all the way off and said now you are pissing me off!!!!! They immediately cut away and went back to the studio with Big Game James Worthy.....

Very entertaining television I might add. Worthy is now talking about Laker arrogance. No urgency on defense, not getting back at all, not rebounding, besides D-12, no energy, etc...... He says they keep saying how they will turn it around, and we see no energy/effort. It would be ok to lose without Nash/Gasol if they had energy/defensive effort, which they don't. Howard horrid from the FT line again. Is he worse than Shaq????

It will be interesting. Kobe expressed love for D'Antoni. We shall see. Everyone is thinking all will be solved with Nash returning. Color me not so sure.....

playmakr
12-11-2012, 08:43 PM
WOw!!!! Just watched the Presser with D'Antoni. Let me just say if Stoops had to face the LA media, he would probably choke someone. :D:D

The coach was asked some tough questions, and things got very heated. Someone asked him if he ever gets concerned when the ball starts in Kobe's hands, and ends in Kobe's hands, without anyone else touching it. He responded, "we do need to look at that, and make some adjustments there". The same reporter not backing off, asked, " is everyone besides Kobe not good enough"? Did you guys bring in Howard to watch Kobe shoot? The coach responded we need to get a better flow, with more people involved.....

He went on to add alot of coach speak about Nash coming back, etc.... At the end some reporter asked why the Lakers don't practice defense?? D'Antoni blew a gasket and accused the guy of lying on the team. The guy said you guys were on the court for almost an hour yesterday morning, and you didn't practice defense at all. D'Antoni then asked the guy, were you there?? I didn't see you in our film room. He then went all the way off and said now you are pissing me off!!!!! They immediately cut away and went back to the studio with Big Game James Worthy.....

Very entertaining television I might add. Worthy is now talking about Laker arrogance. No urgency on defense, not getting back at all, not rebounding, besides D-12, no energy, etc...... He says they keep saying how they will turn it around, and we see no energy/effort. It would be ok to lose without Nash/Gasol if they had energy/defensive effort, which they don't. Howard horrid from the FT line again. Is he worse than Shaq????

It will be interesting. Kobe expressed love for D'Antoni. We shall see. Everyone is thinking all will be solved with Nash returning. Color me not so sure.....
Damn I wish I would have seen that. Would it be up on their team page later?

Also, Howard is a A LOT worse than Shaq at the FT line. The %'s may be the same, but Shaq made a good amount of them late with the game on the line. Howard has cost them a few wins already.

Things will get ugly LA if the play doesn't pick up. Surely Nash will help, but the major problems won't be fixed just by his insertion.

It's a long season though. I remember people clowning the Heat in December, or clowning Dallas early 2 seasons ago. But, this team just doesn't look right.

SoonerBounce13
12-11-2012, 10:15 PM
Irving is amazing

coolm
12-12-2012, 12:57 AM
this game just further convinced me that Kyrie belongs on the All-Star team.

playmakr
12-13-2012, 10:36 PM
Lakers are 1-11 when Kobe scores over 30.

jmizzy4ou
12-14-2012, 08:08 AM
Lakers are 1-11 when Kobe scores over 30.

You can see his frustration building. He is working so hard to get decent looks because no one else on the floor scares opposing defenses at all.

Barkley pointed out something last night I noticed earlier. D-12 is not close to the D-12 of old. This is a guy who once dunked a 12 ft hoop during a dunk contest. It is brutal seeing guys like Varreja(sp), Chandler, and so many no name bigs rising above him for rebounds. At least 5 times this season, he has caught the ball very low on the block, attempted to explode and dunk the ball, only to not be able to get above the rim. I have seen his power moves blocked more this yr than in his entire career.

Barkley said he might still be hurt, or we could be seeing the results of serious back injuries which may have permanently damaged his ability to explode and rise...... I guess time will tell.

At least when Nash returns, KB won't have to work so hard to get a good shot. Watching Duhon & Meeks trying to guard Felton last night was laughable. They had Kidd mic'd up, and he was on the bench telling Felton, go by him!!!!! Go by him!!!! I have watched the last 8 to 10 games the Lakers have played, start to finish. Every team's guards dribbled anywhere they wanted, mostly in the paint. Meeks and Duhon both play hard, but Duhon's on ball defense is laughable, and Meeks not much better.

I actually like Meeks off the bench as a 3 pt specialist. With Nash's ability to penetrate, he should get alot of open 3's, and he shown to be a very good spot up shooter.....

bocabull
12-14-2012, 09:34 AM
Nash has to be loving this. Lets say after he comes back the FG % pops a couple points, the turnovers drop a couple, assists go up a couple, the combination of those things improves points allowed by a couple.

The chants of MVsteve will be raining down in Staples.

sperry
12-14-2012, 10:19 AM
Would love to see the Wizards beat the Lakers tonight. Anyone ever fired 2 coaches in the first 6 weeks of the season?

playmakr
12-14-2012, 01:29 PM
Would love to see the Wizards beat the Lakers tonight. Anyone ever fired 2 coaches in the first 6 weeks of the season?
If the Wizards win tonight the mathematics for the playoffs are starting to not add up.

Right now the Lakers have to go 39-20 to get to 48 wins, the average # of wins for the 8 seed in the West over past 4 full seasons. You have to assume a couple wins vs. the Wizards for them to go 39-20.

If the Lakers went 28-0 at home the rest of the year, they would have to 11-20 on the road the rest of the year to reach the 48 win threshold.

bocabull
12-14-2012, 03:31 PM
silly talk. The Lakers are only 2 games in the win column from the 7 seed after this losing stretch.

Does anybody seriously think they won't have 3 or 4 winning stretches double this losing stretch? Pretty funny to hear Thunder fans talking smack. You could easily see the Lakers exploiting the Thunder fatal weakness inside and taking them out in the 1st round.

playmakr
12-14-2012, 04:08 PM
Pretty funny to hear Thunder fans talking smack. You could easily see the Lakers exploiting the Thunder fatal weakness inside and taking them out in the 1st round.
Let's examine this statement.

Last 10 games between Thunder and Lakers:

Thunder are 8-2, average score 104.3 to 96.

Now, the Thunder's fatal weakness and how LA has dominated them inside:

Points in paint in those 10 games: Lakers 45.0-41.4

Rebounds in those 10 games: Lakers 43.8-41.4


So in summary, yea the Lakers have had a slight advantage in the paint and in rebounding, but obviously it's not been enough to get run by the Thunder over the past 2 plus years. The old men Lakers can't keep up with the young guns in OKC. So, sure, the Lakers can win 4 out of 7 with them after losing 8 of 10, but only a moron could "easily" see it.

bocabull
12-14-2012, 08:19 PM
Thunder have not changed. They are like Dirks old Mavs living & dying by the jump shot. That shooters chance will always fail.

Thunder have never played a single game vs this Lakers team. It's not surprising to see you toss out the "moron" term to make yourself feel smarter. It's like the cowards who claim they need a handgun for self defense. It's 2012. Anybody whose still clinging to their handguns is an insecure paranoid coward.

SoonerBounce13
12-15-2012, 12:14 AM
Thunder have not changed. They are like Dirks old Mavs living & dying by the jump shot. That shooters chance will always fail.

Thunder have never played a single game vs this Lakers team. It's not surprising to see you toss out the "moron" term to make yourself feel smarter. It's like the cowards who claim they need a handgun for self defense. It's 2012. Anybody whose still clinging to their handguns is an insecure paranoid coward.

Jesus Christ man

SoonerBounce13
12-15-2012, 12:16 AM
So bocabull you see the lakers winning two of every three games from here on out?

And eff off on your guns statement. Not the place or time

playmakr
12-15-2012, 12:30 AM
So bocabull you see the lakers winning two of every three games from here on out?

And eff off on your guns statement. Not the place or time
Only a low life tries to make political statements the day of such an event.

As for the Lakers, I actually think they will rally to make the playoffs. I have a lot of respect for Nash's game, and I think he makes a big enough difference in an increasingly watered down West. I don't think the West is as deep as it has been in years past, which gets them in. Sure, they can make some noise, but I doubt it, they are just so slow, and Artest is no longer a plus defender, people are blowing past him.

coolm
12-15-2012, 03:49 PM
meh - what he said about guns is true.

SoonerBounce13
12-15-2012, 09:20 PM
meh - what he said about guns is true.

So I'm an insecure coward for owning a gun for self defense? Sorry but my wife and two kids are worth the world to me and if somebody breaks I to my house, I want to have a chance to protect them. Eff off

coolm
12-16-2012, 10:34 AM
So I'm an insecure coward for owning a gun for self defense? Sorry but my wife and two kids are worth the world to me and if somebody breaks I to my house, I want to have a chance to protect them. Eff off

"eff" yourself. He said "handguns". Protecting your precious family just becomes a convenient excuse so you can exercise 'embiggened' thoughts of participating in a shootout. Shotgun works fine.

SoonerBounce13
12-16-2012, 12:57 PM
"eff" yourself. He said "handguns". Protecting your precious family just becomes a convenient excuse so you can exercise 'embiggened' thoughts of participating in a shootout. Shotgun works fine.

Lol u are a fool. U are a joke. So shotguns are fine but handguns aren't?

SoonerBounce13
12-16-2012, 01:03 PM
Can you expand on your use of precious to describe my family?

coolm
12-16-2012, 02:26 PM
yes, shotguns are fine. I have no problem with normal rifles and shotguns. Hunting is good. Protecting ones' home and family is good.

What's NOT good is keeping a weapon designed for military use and using the excuse of "defense of family" as a reason for justifying it. It's disingenuous and dangerous to the rest of us.

YOU insinuated that your family had a special worth to you so I said precious. Get over it and stop calling me names.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/precious

SoonerBounce13
12-16-2012, 02:59 PM
yes, shotguns are fine. I have no problem with normal rifles and shotguns. Hunting is good. Protecting ones' home and family is good.

What's NOT good is keeping a weapon designed for military use and using the excuse of "defense of family" as a reason for justifying it. It's disingenuous and dangerous to the rest of us.

YOU insinuated that your family had a special worth to you so I said precious. Get over it and stop calling me names.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/precious

You have no idea what you are talking about. Lol this is comical. You may know your sports (debatable) but sounds like you are pretty unintelligent.

You realize this guy killed the kids with a rifle too right? Type of gun doesn't matter. If handguns were outlawed then he either woul have found one illegally or used a rifle.

I will never understand ur type of thinking. If I have a handgun for home defense, how is that different from having a shotgun for home defense?

SoopaSooner
12-16-2012, 06:06 PM
Take this crap somewhere else.

SoonerBounce13
12-16-2012, 06:55 PM
Take this crap somewhere else.

Or you could just not read it.

When something like this shooting happens it will bring up discussions in threads like this until we get an off topic board

coolm
12-16-2012, 07:03 PM
if type of gun doesn't matter then it's fine to get rid of the assault rifles and pistols, right?

I thought not.

If you are so surprised about why I have a problem with handguns as a criminal defense attorney then you are the one sounding rather unintelligent. Maybe you should call your Aunt Mom and Uncle Dad and ask them to explain.

SoopaSooner
12-16-2012, 07:11 PM
Or you could just not read it.

When something like this shooting happens it will bring up discussions in threads like this until we get an off topic board

Read the rules. There's a reason this site doesn't have such discussion.

http://ouhoops.com/forum/announcement.php?a=7

SoonerBounce13
12-16-2012, 07:55 PM
if type of gun doesn't matter then it's fine to get rid of the assault rifles and pistols, right?

I thought not.

If you are so surprised about why I have a problem with handguns as a criminal defense attorney then you are the one sounding rather unintelligent. Maybe you should call your Aunt Mom and Uncle Dad and ask them to explain.

Lol you really are a joke

SoonerBounce13
12-16-2012, 07:56 PM
Never did I say type of gun doesnt matter

coolm
12-16-2012, 08:13 PM
You have no idea what you are talking about. Lol this is comical. You may know your sports (debatable) but sounds like you are pretty unintelligent.

You realize this guy killed the kids with a rifle too right? Type of gun doesn't matter. If handguns were outlawed then he either woul have found one illegally or used a rifle.

I will never understand ur type of thinking. If I have a handgun for home defense, how is that different from having a shotgun for home defense?

really? that sure looks like your quote. fricking moron.

SoonerBounce13
12-16-2012, 08:46 PM
really? that sure looks like your quote. fricking moron.

Lol context son. Learn it

playmakr
12-16-2012, 10:03 PM
Wait, politics and opinions aside, why the hell does a criminal defense attorney have a problem with handguns? That makes no sense. Unless you don't like your job.

I am glad Chicago has some of the strictist gun laws in the country. Thank goodness! It's so peaceful.

coolm
12-17-2012, 03:36 AM
Wait, politics and opinions aside, why the hell does a criminal defense attorney have a problem with handguns? That makes no sense. Unless you don't like your job.

I am glad Chicago has some of the strictist gun laws in the country. Thank goodness! It's so peaceful.

there will always be crime. handguns just make my job more difficult - and unnecessarily so.

putzes want handguns so they can stroke their ego. they dream of a shootout and envision themselves as some Dirty Harry-esque dispenser of justice. Truth is many of them would be better off having that handgun sticking out of their keister, to wit:
http://samuel-warde.com/2012/12/concealed-carry-permit-holders-live-in-a-dream-world-video/

SoonerBounce13
12-17-2012, 06:49 AM
So don't shotguns and rifles make your job harder too?

coolm
12-17-2012, 11:57 AM
So don't shotguns and rifles make your job harder too?

nope. had 1 case with those as an issue in 20 years. hundreds with handguns.

SoonerBounce13
12-17-2012, 12:12 PM
nope. had 1 case with those as an issue in 20 years. hundreds with handguns.

what kind of cases?

playmakr
12-17-2012, 01:36 PM
nope. had 1 case with those as an issue in 20 years. hundreds with handguns.
Don't you want cases?

coolm
12-17-2012, 06:18 PM
Don't you want cases?

I'd prefer cases without those sorts of problems. The stakes jump up rather dramatically when a handgun is involved and it ages you to have someone's life in your hands like that.

bocabull
12-23-2012, 03:02 PM
So I'm an insecure coward for owning a gun for self defense? Sorry but my wife and two kids are worth the world to me and if somebody breaks I to my house, I want to have a chance to protect them. Eff off

Yes you are insecure & paranoid. Guns are for imbeciles. They make you significantly less safe. There have been 364,483 firearm deaths in the US from 1999-2010 and only 3,894 were from the legal intervention of crime. That 3,894 includes all law enforcement firearm deaths.

You have a 1,300% higher chance of getting killed due to being armed. It's laughable that Barney Fife wanna be marksmen think having a gun actually protects them.

The 2nd Amendment protected the rights of citizens to form malitias necessary for the security of our nation. We have the military branches, FBI, state highway patrol, state national guard, county sheriff department, local police forces, etc. We are well protected and the proliferation of guns to a bunch of unqualified wanna be 1 man armies is a far bigger threat to our security than terrorism.

Lakers win their 4th in a row last night. They are still working out the kinks but will definitely be in the hunt if they remain healthy.

SoonerBounce13
12-23-2012, 10:52 PM
Yes you are insecure & paranoid. Guns are for imbeciles. They make you significantly less safe. There have been 364,483 firearm deaths in the US from 1999-2010 and only 3,894 were from the legal intervention of crime. That 3,894 includes all law enforcement firearm deaths.

You have a 1,300% higher chance of getting killed due to being armed. It's laughable that Barney Fife wanna be marksmen think having a gun actually protects them.

The 2nd Amendment protected the rights of citizens to form malitias necessary for the security of our nation. We have the military branches, FBI, state highway patrol, state national guard, county sheriff department, local police forces, etc. We are well protected and the proliferation of guns to a bunch of unqualified wanna be 1 man armies is a far bigger threat to our security than terrorism.

Lakers win their 4th in a row last night. They are still working out the kinks but will definitely be in the hunt if they remain healthy.you ain't worth it

SoonerBounce13
12-23-2012, 10:53 PM
Nm

SoonerBounce13
12-24-2012, 10:15 AM
Bocabull you always brag about how well off you are. But in sure you don't have an alarm system right? Otherwise you ate just insecure and paranoid

bocabull
12-24-2012, 01:05 PM
Yes I have an alarm system. It is disabled because the only people who ever set it off was us accidentally!! Just like there are way more accidental firearm deaths than instances of a firearm used for self defense. Heck a 3 year old in Guthrie, OK just accidentally killed himself with a handgun last week. It happens all the time.

Bounce I have no doubt you love your family & want them safe. In this instance the evidence is pretty strong having a gun does the opposite. The only thing that truly makes us safe are highly regulated, highly trained professional law enforcement organizations.

SoonerBounce13
12-24-2012, 01:38 PM
Yes I have an alarm system. It is disabled because the only people who ever set it off was us accidentally!! Just like there are way more accidental firearm deaths than instances of a firearm used for self defense. Heck a 3 year old in Guthrie, OK just accidentally killed himself with a handgun last week. It happens all the time.

Bounce I have no doubt you love your family & want them safe. In this instance the evidence is pretty strong having a gun does the opposite. The only thing that truly makes us safe are highly regulated, highly trained professional law enforcement organizations.

You are a freaking fool. We all knew that already though so this response does not surprise me

bocabull
12-24-2012, 02:35 PM
So the 3 year old in Guthrie, OK did not kill himself? Out of 364,483 firearm deaths why were only 3,894 in the intervention of a crime? Did the lady in Ct stockpile weapons for self defense only to have the guns taken and used to blow her brains out and then murder 27 others, including 20 first graders? Did the KC Chiefs linebacker flip out and turn a domestic dispute into a double murder?

That's just a few notables from the past couple weeks. Multiply that list by 1,069 and you get the 33,134 people killed every year from firearms.

There's a reason why the resident criminal defense attorney is so against handguns. He sees on a daily basis the death and destruction they cause and also sees the notable lack of real self defense cases.

SoonerBounce13
12-24-2012, 02:52 PM
That's a lot of words for " hey I'm an idiot"

SoonerBounce13
12-24-2012, 02:53 PM
Merry Christmas bocabull. You keep labeling everyone that has a gun or alarm system as paranoid and insecure. I just pray nobody comes in and breaks into your home or threatens your family. But if that does happen, I'm sure the armed robber will leave your home after hearing your statistics.

SoonerBounce13
12-24-2012, 02:54 PM
I guess we should ban automobiles too right?

playmakr
12-24-2012, 04:08 PM
I think I fall fairly down the middle on gun control.

I think the right to own a gun should be protected, especially for those interested in self defense and hunting. (I personally have never hunted a day in my life, but many people enjoy it and are passionate about it)

But I also agree some of these people with arsenal's of guns, enough for a small army, is a bit much, and some of these seriously sick people (bipolar, manic, etc) probably shouldn't own a gun. But I'm just not sure what to do about it. I think there are now so many guns in this country, it's going to hard to control with any sort of regulation. It's not easy to buy a gun in Illinois, but anything besides downtown Chicago or near north or north subs all the way out to the West Subs and basically the entire south side is a war zone, and it keeps getting worse. I'm close to taking a job there (all i have to do is sign) but my wife is scared due to what she hears. It's like the costly/silly/useless War on Drugs which has done essentially nothing to curb drug use and crimes from the sale/use of them. There is so much demand in the market for drugs, it doesn't matter what regulations we come up with. Unfortunately, the culture and morals in our country seem to also dictate a high demand for guns, so no matter what we do I fear they will still be all over the place.

I own a gun that I have in a safe only I can open, and I haven't opened that safe in two years. I would only take it out if I thought an intruder was armed to protect my wife and unborn child. I don't think I should have to give that up because some sick people have used them to kill. But again, surely there is some way to try to at least slow some of these senseless, cowardice killings.

I'm open to any suggestions anyone has, I'm just not sure there is anything that wouldn't have more than a very small impact on gun violence. I wish this wasn't the case, but I fear it is.

stoops4pres
12-24-2012, 04:54 PM
I think I fall fairly down the middle on gun control.

I think the right to own a gun should be protected, especially for those interested in self defense and hunting. (I personally have never hunted a day in my life, but many people enjoy it and are passionate about it)

But I also agree some of these people with arsenal's of guns, enough for a small army, is a bit much, and some of these seriously sick people (bipolar, manic, etc) probably shouldn't own a gun. But I'm just not sure what to do about it. I think there are now so many guns in this country, it's going to hard to control with any sort of regulation. It's not easy to buy a gun in Illinois, but anything besides downtown Chicago or near north or north subs all the way out to the West Subs and basically the entire south side is a war zone, and it keeps getting worse. I'm close to taking a job there (all i have to do is sign) but my wife is scared due to what she hears. It's like the costly/silly/useless War on Drugs which has done essentially nothing to curb drug use and crimes from the sale/use of them. There is so much demand in the market for drugs, it doesn't matter what regulations we come up with. Unfortunately, the culture and morals in our country seem to also dictate a high demand for guns, so no matter what we do I fear they will still be all over the place.

I own a gun that I have in a safe only I can open, and I haven't opened that safe in two years. I would only take it out if I thought an intruder was armed to protect my wife and unborn child. I don't think I should have to give that up because some sick people have used them to kill. But again, surely there is some way to try to at least slow some of these senseless, cowardice killings.

I'm open to any suggestions anyone has, I'm just not sure there is anything that wouldn't have more than a very small impact on gun violence. I wish this wasn't the case, but I fear it is.

This.

jmizzy4ou
12-24-2012, 06:29 PM
Thought better of entering the fray on gun control..........



I like what I saw from My Lakers against GS. When the game was getting away from them, they locked down on defense and won the game. Kobe/Nash/Meeks/and MWP all picked it up defensively late, and D-12 made a couple of big blocks and shot changing plays.

They will be able to score, but they must improve as a team defensively. Kobe took 41 shots. 41. Say that slowly, 41 shots!!!!!!!!! Not good........

bocabull
12-24-2012, 10:03 PM
Sorry to burst your mythical bubble but Oklahoma has a 35% higher gun fatality rate than Illinois. The southern states with the most promiscuous gun laws have the worst firearm fatality rates. The states with tighter gun regulations have much better results. There is a direct correlation. Saying there is nothing that can be done is an ignorant talking point put forward by the gun lobby.

Firearm Deaths (http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-death-rate-per-100-000)

Gun Control Laws work (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/)

SoonerBounce13
12-24-2012, 11:23 PM
Sorry to burst your mythical bubble but Oklahoma has a 35% higher gun fatality rate than Illinois. The southern states with the most promiscuous gun laws have the worst firearm fatality rates. The states with tighter gun regulations have much better results. There is a direct correlation. Saying there is nothing that can be done is an ignorant talking point put forward by the gun lobby.

Firearm Deaths (http://www.statemaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-death-rate-per-100-000)

Gun Control Laws work (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/)

How about comparing countries with stricter gun laws vs the us?

playmakr
12-25-2012, 01:00 AM
Bounce don't let him post misleading stats. Do research and reading on the subject and learn it on your own. Tighter gun laws have not led to less gun crimes in the U.S. Period. You can research it yourself. The first link he posted is woefully and embarrassingly misleading. It doesn't separate suicides from homicides, doesn't separate self defense acts, etc.. Suicide accounts for around 50% of firearm deaths, so a study only saying "firearm deaths" means nothing. It's not a crime study, and is also from 2002. Another thing to note, Bounce, is the shooter in CT tried to buy a gun a few days before the event and was denied. This case is Exhibit A.

This will be my last post on the subject. There is no reason to argue with someone who would actually post such an obviously faulty study from 2002. He's not interested in any debate, he's a political dogmatist.

As I said I'm open to any good ideas, but I'll leave the dogmatism and bloviation to him.

Bounce, during your research, start with this: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20

Keep this in mind when the push from members of Congress in 2013 for "assault rifles" is initiated.

SoonerBounce13
12-25-2012, 07:36 AM
Good stuff. I'm done with this thread too.

Merry Christmas everyone. Enjoy your family and friends

coolm
12-25-2012, 10:00 AM
You don't have a need for assault weapons other than penis envy. plain and simple. To that extent they're not covered under the 2nd amendment IAW Heller so the question becomes: does the need to play Rambo outweigh the danger?

No. It doesn't. It's that simple.

Minimally that takes away assault weapons and mass delivery systems for ammunition (drums etc...). Is it an ABSOLUTE solution? No, of course not. But if it prevents even one death then it's justified. It doesn't have to be an absolute solution. We knock one leg of the offense out, just like we did for meth production, and it detracts.

I am sorry, but you guys are wrong. I know it makes you feel all glorious and grunt-worthy to own and shoot awesome assault weapons ... but to say these are NEEDED is an absolute farce and the Supreme Court has already ruled there is no right to them.

game. set. match.

SoonerBounce13
12-25-2012, 10:44 AM
You don't have a need for assault weapons other than penis envy. plain and simple. To that extent they're not covered under the 2nd amendment IAW Heller so the question becomes: does the need to play Rambo outweigh the danger?

No. It doesn't. It's that simple.

Minimally that takes away assault weapons and mass delivery systems for ammunition (drums etc...). Is it an ABSOLUTE solution? No, of course not. But if it prevents even one death then it's justified. It doesn't have to be an absolute solution. We knock one leg of the offense out, just like we did for meth production, and it detracts.

I am sorry, but you guys are wrong. I know it makes you feel all glorious and grunt-worthy to own and shoot awesome assault weapons ... but to say these are NEEDED is an absolute farce and the Supreme Court has already ruled there is no right to them.

game. set. match.

Welcome late to the party. We aren't even talking about assault rifles.

And you may say it's just penis envy but it's also called a hobby. Just like owning a high horse power car or expensive golf clubs.

bocabull
12-25-2012, 11:01 AM
Leave it to a conservative to belittle and question official statistics that weaken their argument only to, wait for it, post a link to more statistics that show the same thing. Even your cherry picked micro stats show your wrong.

Playmakrs FBI stats:

Illinois population 12.9 Million.
Illinois Murders 452 or 3.5/100,000
Illinois Firearm Murders 377 2.92/100,000

Oklahoma Population 3.7 Million
Oklahoma Murders 204 or 5.51/100,000 or 58% worse than Illinois.
Oklahoma Firearm Murders 131 or 3.54/100,000 or 21% worse than Illinois.

Of course I'm quite certain this is over your head because math & conservative do not correlate.

coolm
12-25-2012, 02:33 PM
Late? I seem to remember being in this discussion already.

a HOBBY? then there's certainly no Constitutional protection for a hobby so BYE BYE assault weapons.

that was easy. ty.

SoonerBounce13
12-25-2012, 03:47 PM
Late? I seem to remember being in this discussion already.

a HOBBY? then there's certainly no Constitutional protection for a hobby so BYE BYE assault weapons.

that was easy. ty.
For being an attorney, your iq doesn't seem too high

coolm
12-25-2012, 04:59 PM
For being an attorney, your iq doesn't seem too high

TRANSLATION: "I have absolutely no clue what you're talking about cool so YOU must be the unintelligent one"

Why don't YOU explain Heller to me Mr Einstein. any time you'd like to have a battle of wits then by all means step up - but as far as I have seen you always come unarmed.

SoonerBounce13
12-25-2012, 05:47 PM
TRANSLATION: "I have absolutely no clue what you're talking about cool so YOU must be the unintelligent one"

Why don't YOU explain Heller to me Mr Einstein. any time you'd like to have a battle of wits then by all means step up - but as far as I have seen you always come unarmed.

Lol

coolm
12-25-2012, 06:32 PM
me: explain Heller

bounce: ::crickets::

you sound like a typical low-IQ Yukon graduate.

SoonerBounce13
12-25-2012, 06:41 PM
me: explain Heller

bounce: ::crickets::

you sound like a typical low-IQ Yukon graduate.

I have no idea what heller is and it's irrelevant to my iq

coolm
12-25-2012, 10:19 PM
I have no idea what heller is ...

exactly ... and in this discussion it's very relevant to your IQ. it's so fitting that you'd insult me because you don't understand. typical.

SoonerBounce13
12-25-2012, 11:02 PM
exactly ... and in this discussion it's very relevant to your IQ. it's so fitting that you'd insult me because you don't understand. typical.

It has nothing to do with my iq or your iq.

Can I ask you specifics about my line of work and when you don't know the answer base your iq on that?

bocabull
12-26-2012, 12:09 PM
exactly ... and in this discussion it's very relevant to your IQ. it's so fitting that you'd insult me because you don't understand. typical.

Of course it's typical. Guns are for paranoid idiots.

I laugh at Playmakr saying he's got a handgun that has been locked in a safe for 2 years and he somehow thinks if that mythical home invasion happens all of a sudden he's going to be able to safely and proficiently use it to protect himself.

Of course all the evidence shows the dip will more than likely have a Plaxico Burress event and cause himself to be injured.

SoonerBounce13
12-26-2012, 12:32 PM
Of course it's typical. Guns are for paranoid idiots.

I laugh at Playmakr saying he's got a handgun that has been locked in a safe for 2 years and he somehow thinks if that mythical home invasion happens all of a sudden he's going to be able to safely and proficiently use it to protect himself.

Of course all the evidence shows the dip will more than likely have a Plaxico Burress event and cause himself to be injured.

Odds are one may never have to use it. But it's about being prepared. That doesn't mean one is paranoid. I'm not paranoid, I'm not an idiot and I have a gun. It's doing what you have to to protect a family. Should we go and dig up stories of a gun saving people's lives?

NickZepp
12-26-2012, 08:32 PM
Move the gun rights talk to another board. Banning guns is about as stupid as banning drugs has been and will only promote violence. You look at many of these instances of mass killings hardly any of them bought the guns they used in a legal manner.

playmakr
12-26-2012, 09:02 PM
I have no idea why I am responding to this drivel....

Leave it to a conservative to belittle and question official statistics that weaken their argument only to, wait for it, post a link to more statistics that show the same thing. Even your cherry picked micro stats show your wrong.

Playmakrs FBI stats:

Illinois population 12.9 Million.
Illinois Murders 452 or 3.5/100,000
Illinois Firearm Murders 377 2.92/100,000

Oklahoma Population 3.7 Million
Oklahoma Murders 204 or 5.51/100,000 or 58% worse than Illinois.
Oklahoma Firearm Murders 131 or 3.54/100,000 or 21% worse than Illinois.

Of course I'm quite certain this is over your head because math & conservative do not correlate.
Boca, son, the FBI link was for Bounces (and I guess now CoolM's) information to show how few murders occur with rifles. (But I do agree with CoolM that if one life is saved then let's talk about it) A smart person would have deduced this by reading the words....Bounce start with this about rifles....Now, I realize you aren't very smart and you are simply pushing an agenda, which is a poor combination, but please try to use what little brain power you have to not waste my time. At no time did anyone but you choose to compare Oklahoma and Illinois.

More credible and relevant information is to look at what happened as a result of what laws in each state. For example, as I briefly touched on, there was a handgun ban in Chicago in the 80's, and it did nothing to quell gun violence, in fact the homicide rates went up (there was a dip in the late 90s and early 2000s with the economy roaring and Chicago has followed the nation in decreasing gun violence trends after the increases) and the amount of guns in population at best has stayed the same, despite registries decreasing. The SCOTUS a few years ago has since ruled the ban unconstitutional in a landmark decision post Heller citing the 14th Amendment which the Heller ruling didn't touch, but Quinn and his coterie in the state legislature have made it so difficult to get a license they might as well still be banned. Even still, since the ban was ruled unconstitutional, the gun violence has actually gone down, but I would note it is a drop consistent with the recent drop nationwide.

As noted, over the past decade plus, gun violence has decreased in this country as gun control has decreased and gun crime has gone down as the amount of guns has increased, (but also less owners, on the flip side) according to your FBI.. Now, I am not going to suggest a direct correlation because of the wide range of factors such as the impact of black market on gun #'s, but to try and argue/correlate the opposite doesnt even make sense and is moronic or blissfully ignorant. Also, these trends do not necessarily mean there aren't rational steps to take to limit these shooting sprees. I'm certainly not saying that.

Let me know if you need any further education on the situation in Illinois, it is a bellwether state on this issue.

You can go on as many mindless rants as you want, but I remain skeptical of the progress which could be made when such actions have had no impact to this point. The tough laws in CT both worked and failed, all in one horrible tragedy. Granted, you haven't actually proposed anything, you have only screamed at the top of your lungs that guns are bad. If you actually made a legitimate proposal, you might find I would be more receptive to it than your limited scope (no pun intended) imagines. But that's not how you operate. Your M.O. is to make anyone not as far left as Kucinich and yourself look like a brainless/backwards kook. That way, you falsely appear brilliant and, cool. It's a common strategy for people who have only discussed issues with people that agree with them, or the weak minded.

Of course it's typical. Guns are for paranoid idiots.

I laugh at Playmakr saying he's got a handgun that has been locked in a safe for 2 years and he somehow thinks if that mythical home invasion happens all of a sudden he's going to be able to safely and proficiently use it to protect himself.

Of course all the evidence shows the dip will more than likely have a Plaxico Burress event and cause himself to be injured.
I haven't opened the safe in two years because that's the time when our old home in Oklahoma City was intruded by an armed burglar who kicked in the door in the middle of the damn afternoon. Luckily the situation didn't escalate and the coward ran off. And I can handle the gun fine.

The District of Columbia vs. Heller that CoolM cited specifically upheld the legality of owning handguns, ESPECIALLY for self defense within the home. Hell, that's the main portion of the SCOTUS ruling. One could say it's the backbone of the ruling. So you can lol like an ignorant bozo all you want, but the SCOTUS has spoken and I'm going to keep my gun. Will I ever need it? Probably not. But I'm not willing to bet my families life on it, and the law of the land, upheld by the SCOTUS, states I don't have to. So take it up with them.

Note, boca, if it were you invading my home, I wouldn't need the gun. I'm sure you wouldn't be armed.

playmakr
12-26-2012, 09:11 PM
My apologies to Grace, I am a recovering argumentoholic I will try to stick to basketball moving forward.

coolm
12-26-2012, 10:14 PM
1. Nick be quiet. You need about 20 years of aging to even warrant registering an opinion on the topic seeing as how you really don't need to defend your mom's basement.

2. Like I said - I have no problems with guns used for defense. But assault weapons and mass delivery systems have no place in that and don't fit under Heller ... so they receive no protection. To that extent the "sheer joy and hobby pleasure" that they provide is outweighed by the risk imposed on society.

3. amidst all of your efforts to look at stats for support you must keep in mind that it's near impossible to prove a negative ... especially in this case. how do you prove something that would have happened instead didnt? I guess if we all donned evil goatees and stepped into the alternate universe we could see - but other than that we don't know.

Causation is iffy to just say there are more or less incidents after action "A" - you guys can try to say some gun violence went up and I can contend that Australia and the UK havent had a mass school killing incident since. All we really know is in some circumstances taking an element of an offense away can be an effective indirect method of fighting some crimes - like meth production or possibly mass shootings in schools.

All that said the simple fact that it is NOT protected and it is certainly dangerous means we do a CBA on it - and it loses. So face facts. No assault weapons under private ownership and no mass delivery systems.

stoops4pres
12-26-2012, 10:15 PM
I have no idea why I am responding to this drivel....


Boca, son, the FBI link was for Bounces (and I guess now CoolM's) information to show how few murders occur with rifles. (But I do agree with CoolM that if one life is saved then let's talk about it) A smart person would have deduced this by reading the words....Bounce start with this about rifles....Now, I realize you aren't very smart and you are simply pushing an agenda, which is a poor combination, but please try to use what little brain power you have to not waste my time. At no time did anyone but you choose to compare Oklahoma and Illinois.

More credible and relevant information is to look at what happened as a result of what laws in each state. For example, as I briefly touched on, there was a handgun ban in Chicago in the 80's, and it did nothing to quell gun violence, in fact the homicide rates went up (there was a dip in the late 90s and early 2000s with the economy roaring and Chicago has followed the nation in decreasing gun violence trends after the increases) and the amount of guns in population at best has stayed the same, despite registries decreasing. The SCOTUS a few years ago has since ruled the ban unconstitutional in a landmark decision post Heller citing the 14th Amendment which the Heller ruling didn't touch, but Quinn and his coterie in the state legislature have made it so difficult to get a license they might as well still be banned. Even still, since the ban was ruled unconstitutional, the gun violence has actually gone down, but I would note it is a drop consistent with the recent drop nationwide.

As noted, over the past decade plus, gun violence has decreased in this country as gun control has decreased and gun crime has gone down as the amount of guns has increased, (but also less owners, on the flip side) according to your FBI.. Now, I am not going to suggest a direct correlation because of the wide range of factors such as the impact of black market on gun #'s, but to try and argue/correlate the opposite doesnt even make sense and is moronic or blissfully ignorant. Also, these trends do not necessarily mean there aren't rational steps to take to limit these shooting sprees. I'm certainly not saying that.

Let me know if you need any further education on the situation in Illinois, it is a bellwether state on this issue.

You can go on as many mindless rants as you want, but I remain skeptical of the progress which could be made when such actions have had no impact to this point. The tough laws in CT both worked and failed, all in one horrible tragedy. Granted, you haven't actually proposed anything, you have only screamed at the top of your lungs that guns are bad. If you actually made a legitimate proposal, you might find I would be more receptive to it than your limited scope (no pun intended) imagines. But that's not how you operate. Your M.O. is to make anyone not as far left as Kucinich and yourself look like a brainless/backwards kook. That way, you falsely appear brilliant and, cool. It's a common strategy for people who have only discussed issues with people that agree with them, or the weak minded.


I haven't opened the safe in two years because that's the time when our old home in Oklahoma City was intruded by an armed burglar who kicked in the door in the middle of the damn afternoon. Luckily the situation didn't escalate and the coward ran off. And I can handle the gun fine.

The District of Columbia vs. Heller that CoolM cited specifically upheld the legality of owning handguns, ESPECIALLY for self defense within the home. Hell, that's the main portion of the SCOTUS ruling. One could say it's the backbone of the ruling. So you can lol like an ignorant bozo all you want, but the SCOTUS has spoken and I'm going to keep my gun. Will I ever need it? Probably not. But I'm not willing to bet my families life on it, and the law of the land, upheld by the SCOTUS, states I don't have to. So take it up with them.

Note, boca, if it were you invading my home, I wouldn't need the gun.

playmakr bringing the heat!!! #PunIntended

stoops4pres
12-26-2012, 10:16 PM
1. Nick be quiet. You need about 20 years of aging to even warrant registering an opinion on the topic seeing as how you really don't need to defend your mom's basement.

2. Like I said - I have no problems with guns used for defense. But assault weapons and mass delivery systems have no place in that and don't fit under Heller ... so they receive no protection. To that extent the "sheer joy and hobby pleasure" that they provide is outweighed by the risk imposed on society.

3. amidst all of your efforts to look at stats for support you must keep in mind that it's near impossible to prove a negative ... especially in this case. how do you prove something that would have happened instead didnt? I guess if we all donned evil goatees and stepped into the alternate universe we could see - but other than that we don't know.

Causation is iffy to just say there are more or less incidents after action "A" - you guys can try to say some gun violence went up and I can contend that Australia and the UK havent had a mass school killing incident since. All we really know is in some circumstances taking an element of an offense away can be an effective indirect method of fighting some crimes - like meth production or possibly mass shootings in schools.

All that said the simple fact that it is NOT protected and it is certainly dangerous means we do a CBA on it - and it loses. So face facts. No assault weapons under private ownership and no mass delivery systems.

Man, it's getting real on OUHoops right now.

playmakr
12-27-2012, 12:02 AM
playmakr bringing the heat!!! #PunIntended
Naw it came out funny, I meant because he wouldn't have a gun.

SoonerBounce13
12-27-2012, 07:43 AM
2. Like I said - I have no problems with guns used for defense.

except if it's a handgun

SoonerBounce13
12-27-2012, 07:43 AM
what do you all think about the newspaper that outed the addresses of all the registered gun owners?

coolm
12-27-2012, 02:04 PM
except if it's a handgun

true, but I hafta give in there because Heller protects them.

That was wrong to list all the names.

jmizzy4ou
01-20-2013, 04:18 PM
Another Laker loss..... today to Toronto. D-12 ejected in the 1st half.......

BLOW IT UP!!!!! START OVER!!!!!!!


**************please no more handgun debate************

playmakr
01-20-2013, 07:18 PM
BLOW IT UP
I see what you did there. :)

coolm
01-20-2013, 09:32 PM
oh no no no

they're ALL STARS!

they're the greatest players on the planet.

jmizzy4ou
01-20-2013, 10:03 PM
oh no no no

they're ALL STARS!

they're the greatest players on the planet.

Hahahahaha... still upset about the Faried slight I see. :ez-laugh::ez-laugh:


All star laden teams rarely win titles. Chemistry is usually an issue with more than 2 or 3 all stars......

NickZepp
01-21-2013, 12:05 PM
Chemistry is important but you also need an actual bench that will do something. The Lakers really don't have that right now. The Lakers production from the starters have been enough to win a lot of games.

coolm
01-21-2013, 07:15 PM
Hahahahaha... still upset about the Faried slight I see. :ez-laugh::ez-laugh:


All star laden teams rarely win titles. Chemistry is usually an issue with more than 2 or 3 all stars......

yes ... yes I am. LOL

bocabull
01-28-2013, 03:53 PM
Why wasn't this thread updated yesterday?