FUDU wrote:I see some serious flaws and inconsistencies in your thinking here.
First you're missing the point of most of the people's comparison to Plax (at least my own personal one). The point being he and Gilbert Gump had a choice, the choice to not bring the guns (where the guns were not needed, nor legally permitted) regardless of the reasons they had in their own minds.
Second, you admit anybody with a normal job would have been fired on the spot and sent to jail. Yet you follow that up by saying it is OUR fault for bitching about these guys getting away with these things b/c we pay the price of admission....doesn't make much sense (am I misreading you here?).
Third, I have no problem with your stance on drunk driving, and agree for the most part that it takes a very bad result before a serious penalty is handed down most times. However you are complaining that the repercussions are often too late relative the the risk of the action yet at the same time you are saying Gilbert didn't harm anyone or didn't plan on harming anyone (therefor not deserving a punishment or the one handed down), you are completely contradicting yourself there. Do you want action taken before something bad happens or don't you? I mean like the late Sam Kinison said "we're all doin our best, nobody goes out to see how fucked up they can get....it's not like you're going out to your car saying "boy I sure hope I slide into a family of six tonight, whooooo!". You are against people getting behind the wheel of a car after drinking (due to the terrible harm it can cause), OK fine, a solid stand to take. Well many people are against other people bringing guns out where guns are not relatively needed or justified (due to the terrible harm they can cause).
Stern took a stand, a preemptive one so to speak. Made an example out of a trending situation before the situation made an example out of him and the NBA.
Was the punishment a bit harsh, eh I can listen to the argument, but it wasn't so unreasonable as for people to cry themselves a river.
Gilbert Gump is the only one to blame for Gilbert's situation right now.
On the first point, I though it was clear what I meant. A person carrying a loaded weapon into a public place then discharging it is much much much much much much different then bringing in guns KNOWN to be unloaded to play a prank on a teammate. I mean, is there really any question these 2 are totally different offenses? That's like comparing Tommy pulling on Harry when Harry was clowning him to Vince Vega blasting Marvin's brains all over Jules' whip. Its stupid, I get it. Forget the stupidity, I'm talking word of the law here, not good/bad decision making. They're is a clear difference between the two.
2nd point - Maybe its not entirely the fans fault, but its a simple fact that in our society money can buy you a lot of things, power and a legal backing that would make Monty Burns jealous most notably. People gripe and moan about athletes/politicians/celebrities getting fair treatment but they're going to find a way around it as long as the cheddar keeps flowing. As for people bitching, I think my point stands. We live in a free market economy, people make choices to spend their hard earned $$$ on sports. I am not advocating that people who have money SHOULD be able to get away with things normal people wouldn't, but they WILL because of the system. I have no problem when there is outrage when said athletes/politicians/celebs get just slaps on the wrist, but those slaps on the wrist are carried out by judges. If there is scorn to be had on uneven treatment of US citizens, it lies with the people at the top. Don't hate the player, hate the game. And for anyone that does bitch about it, you trying to convince me if you had all the $$$ in the vault at your disposal you WOULDN'T hire the best legal team to get yourself out of a sticky situation. Basically, this rich vs poor argument falls entirely outside the realms of what we are discussing and into bigger socio/economic issues that are rampant in this country.
About Gilbert, I am not contradicting anything! The GUY WASN'T OUT TO HARM ANYONE. You say the repercussions are often too late - you're taking a huge leap of faith in that statement in its application to Gilbert IE you're implying he is eventually going to shoot someone. Taking that a step further, simply by having a gun automatically means you are going to shoot someone at some point right? Christ on cracker the comparison to drunk driving wasn't mean to draw a parallel to him. If you go out an pound a 1/5 of bourbon, you're going to crash and kill someone or yourself at some point. I work with a guy who has a gun at him at ALL TIMES. He's an upstanding citizen and a great father. Guess what, he isn't shooting someone at the office, period. Point is, the harm isn't the gun, its the individual who has it. A normal person can walk around with a concealed carry and never have a problem. If said citizen then flashes it or talks shit, or does anything to provoke anything that would have the gun go off and cause bodily harm, then its their stupidity at fault. Again, the guns aren't the problem its the craziest and irresponsible hot heads who have them.
Just to be clear my purpose of bringing out drunk driving is that IMO its a completely indefensible crime and blatantly shows
A)complete lack of obeying the law - fits Gil even if his weren't loaded
B)complete lack of good judgment - not against the law but doesn't help
C)The punishment for drunk driving isn't enough while people who do LESSER crimes get far worst judgment - This is the big one: Gil's crime in comparison is
nothing compared to the consequences of the former IMHO.
"All Beckett needs to do to cap off this mess is order some fried chicken and beer" – 5/10/12 before Beckett got chased in the 3rd at Fenway.
<- edit - I guess I need to insert this at this rate 
