Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by zDragon

  1. I"m a lurker and enjoy reading the threads here and post occasionally. My input is shut it down. I see where Joe is coming from and it is not about money, paying mods, etc. It is about the effort he has to put into trying to keep the forum in line with what he wants his brand to represent. When you look at everyone responding they want to keep it up and running the majority really are the issue posters and it will not change. Many have aliases which you can see time to time as they switch out or by the tone and composition of the posts. I assume this is because they have been banned and want to continue what they believe is a conversation. This tells me it will never change. I respect Joe for giving everyone a chance before making a decision. This is a good community outside of this forum and the boards are great. Thanks for all the hard work Joe.
  2. Didn't realize the Chair of the FAA had that power and then the issue wouldn't be with his views but rather with the people who would appoint him to Chair the FAA knowing he was not qualified for the position. Then the issue would be all the other committees, industry leaders, and international groups going along with it. Seems like a bad example. Polls are only as good as the methodology they use and back end analysis and tweaking they do. That's why you immediately start qualifying your statement. Population, Response Bias, and a lot of factors influence them. Even well structured polls can be way off....probably why they are called Opinion Polls. On FiveThirtyEight a site A- site missed on 80% of the races it polled on. So your mileage may vary but if you are looking at polls I would suggest sites like FiveThirtyEight to get the average of all polls on a particular race to get the best input. The link is to their rating page. So i can easily see the view of not liking and thinking polls are junk. It is in fact no where close to the out their example given.
  3. 1. You do not absorb material well. If no one else called it a ban why is it called a ban in the Wikipedia article? "The Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act or Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) was a subsection of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, a United States federal law which included a prohibition" The 10-year ban was passed by the US Congress on September 13, 1994, Studies have shown the ban has had little effect in overall criminal activity, firearm homicides, or the lethality of gun crimes
  4. Your source proved you wrong. "The term assault rifle is generally attributed to Adolf Hitler........However, other sources dispute that Hitler had much to do with coining the new name besides signing the production order" last response to this. No need to have a conversation with someone who doesn't read there own resources.
  5. The sources you provided show references prior to what you are trying to say. Then you changed the terms you wanted to use, then you went on to semantics, then on to modern age. i'm sure you next point of reason would be in the last three decades, etc,etc. I've already figured out that you were wrong since you provided your sources. So really I'm just filling time but seems like you have a unhealthy obsession here. I'd suggest taking a break to level your thought process.
  6. I responded to your statement that the Gun industry originally came up with the term. Which it is obvious they did not and that is not semantics. I could care less about SC and you calling each other liars. I simply wanted to know the basis of your statement.
  7. Seems to me no matter what you say your wrong as proved by your links. Sure say "modern" so it fits your point. From what I can tell from your links is the US military was already using the term along with others and the Germans named there firs tone after it. It seem the industry had a book advertised in Guns & Ammo way after for their first use of the term. Why are you mentioning anything about Mr. Cat? Not sure how that fits this conversation. Guess your obsessed with that poster or are you saying your lies are better than his lies? What did lies come up again?
  8. You said "The term assault rifle was first used by the gun industry for marketing purposes.". This is a false statement. It looks good for what you want to use it for but in fact is wrong.
  9. Must have missed the assault spoon and fork comment the other poster made or your making up details not sure which. As far as assault knives they are a thing even to the definition you highlighted.
  10. Out of how many? Last I saw it was over 35 million. Your comparison is not even close to being right. You comparing an accidental shooting which is most likely a mishandling of a gun to a targeted shooting with the intent to kill
  11. Interesting you change the term from Assault Rifle to Assault Weapon. Even then you are quoting the portion that fits your narrative. You completely ignored the same Wikipedia entry that point out the term was not created by the Gun Industry. "In the past, the names of certain military weapons used the phrase, such as the Rifleman's Assault Weapon, a grenade launcher developed in 1977". This was over a decade before the book mentioned in the footnotes. Assault Rifle on the other hand was the literal name of a German gun. So it has been in use way prior to what your are referencing.
  12. That doesn't sound right at all. Source?
  13. Explain? Where is the fallacy in the statement?
  14. Not the conversation I was remarking on.
  15. Not really. Just get the proper permits.
  16. How does that show the impact to wild life populations of each species mentioned? There isn't even data on the 500 trapping licenses they handed out for pest control? How many animals do they harvest compared to the 1,500+ reported by licensed trappers? Of the the animals harvested what is the breakdown by species and what is the breading rate for each species. So no real data in the article to back up anything that was mentioned. I'd love to see the real data which with the statement made I thought you might have.
  17. Can you back this up with data? I'd like to see what the expected impacts are.
  18. What are the odds? Maybe compare two or three things.
  19. So why do you think that? The perfect nap time is 20 minutes.
  20. Why not? He should be as open-carry is a right that comes with some restrictions. In Texas one of them being a person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly "displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm.". This seems to fit the bill especially since he was wearing body armor. Maybe in Missouri it is different.
  21. Your stat and comment was useless is all I was pointing out. Sorry you feel like it meant something. Maybe put some logic, context, or hard data behind it next time.
  22. Statistics show that 100% of the people that drink water die. I also believe that those same stats would apply to Cars, Alcohol, weed, pools etc. Anyway, I agree we need more restrictions but that is just a bad statement.