Leaderboard

That's some cherry picked propaganda "history". None of those countries had an actual gun culture, any weapons there were primary used for hunting and they sure as hell were not assault rifles. In Germany the law was easily bypassed and there was absolutely no desire to get rid of Nazis, after all they were voted in and fully supported by the population. resistance was not muted by the lack of weapons(which would be useless anyway) but by desire to follow hitler...to hell. On the other hand the communist countries simply got rid of guns(not all guns, you could still hunt) for the same reasons as virtually all western countries, easier to deal with criminals and general loonies They did not fear Vania, Raul or Young Ho with his pistol or cheap rifle going against their T-50 tanks. Today population having guns has no relevance on freedom what so ever, any resisting would be swatted away with minimal effort, a military drone can end a conversation before you knew you were having one. In the end we are far from the age of the musket and it's dated armed militia ideals.

EDIT - he was responding to this from the Trump Administration. The new format doesn't allow secondary tweet embedding, so it's a bit confusing. Mr. Goat raises a couple of interesting points. 1) The "timing" argument is a cheap trick to push the argument off in perpetuity. It's inherently dishonest, and not intended to open a realistic dialogue. 2) The pro-gun crowd will eventually have to come to the table. There are more of us not in that crowd, and sooner or later those of us for whom guns aren't a hobby will get fed up enough to force the debate. It is in the best interest of pro-gun folks to start the dialogue now, with honest intentions and a willingness to concede position, or there will come a time when they have no position to concede.

I personally don't think a rifle is a great home defense weapon there are several reasons for that, but to me the best home defense option is the good old shotgun. Just operating the action alone will make a bad guy rethink his decision. Squeezing of 5 or 6 warning shots probably isn't going to happen if we're being honest. If it's a home invasion in the middle of the night by the time you realize what's going on you either aren't getting to your gun or you are only getting off a few shots at the bad guys.

It changes it about as much as your post (that negatively attributes something that might happen over the next two weeks to Mike Riley) makes sense.

Boy, how the times have changed. Ever since Bob Devaney came to Lincoln from WY, it was to make NU into a winner. Not competing, no doing ok, no "moral" victories.....but to WIN. NU has all the facilities and resources it needs to do this and since the early 2000's we have been in constant purgatory and have watched college football catch up and pass us by. From the late 60's to late 90's, everyone in Nebraska expected to win every game. Period, end of story. We expected to take on anyone and win. For 30+ years, we were competing for championships almost every single season. Even the "bad" seasons, we were better than 9 wins and were bowling. After doing this for 30+ years, the standard was set, and we have fallen on some very hard times. Even the 9 and 10 win seasons in the last decade, it was obvious that the NU swagger was gone and things have not been right. I don't want to show up Saturday to hope we keep it close and walk away happy if we lose. Losing by 3 or 30 is still a big L on the schedule. It is sad that we even debate the idea of not winning them all every year, but that is how far we have fallen.

In that vain, many of the people who preach the 2nd Amendment in the wake of dozens of people being injured and murdered are also the people that claim to be 100% Pro Life.

Are we calling all the liberal democracies of Europe fascist regimes that disarm their citizenry? You know what looks a lot less like a democracy? A gerrymandered-to-s#t republic where popular representation is a joke, the big money gun lobby writes the rules, and our 'leader' is going after the livelihoods of his critics while attempting to make public displays of nationalism de facto mandatory.

Ahh, the RileyMath...Where a close loss at home is like a win. Things I never want to hear again..."Run the option" and "As long as we play hard and don't embarrass the school or state" Win some f'ing games.

As a side note, in this discussion... the NRA is such a joke. I don't think they give a crap about gun rights or responsibility or any of that jazz. I think they care about gun law deregulation and moving more guns. Agree/disagree?

Sounds solid to me.

Did we just figure out who was advising Eichorst on Friday games?

I like the whole idea of the Iron N, but these guys REALLY need to hammer out their message. This is about the third different version of this I've seen this week. Let's have a Blackout. The Blackout is for the student section. The Blackout is for everyone. But mostly it's for the student section. But really, everyone do it.

https://twitter.com/SarcasticRover/status/914876425785679872

If disarming the citizenry meant people could feel more comfortable going to concerts, movies, church, school or the mall, then sign me up.

Beware: those 3 green dots are Tanner Lee pick sixes.

Another streak that is bound to come to an end under the direction of Mike Riley.

The amount of people that need automatic weapons: 0

Wrong. I’m a gun owner and take that right very seriously. Im so sick of the crap spewed by the NRA and constantly repeated by other gun owners. Thus us is exactly why nothing will change on this issue. People just spewing political crap without thought.

shirts need to be given at the gate or it will fail.

If Nebraska turns this around and goes to Indy this year, I can't think of a way in which that is a 'problem'

<<<<<<<<<

I don't care who has him on their short list. If this season continues the path it's on, Nebraska needs to go get him.

Terrorist is a word that is both overused and underused. It is contentious and politically charged. Many countries/ regimes use the term in order to stigmatize and delegitimize opposition groups. Some Americans use the term to justify racist/xenophobic anti-muslim beliefs. The UN has attempted to create a universial definition of terrorism for decades, without success. The US State department has a definition that requires the "terrorist" to be a subnational or clandestine group. This, of course, ignores domestically-sourced killers that use terror as a tactic. I would be fine just scrapping the term altogether and using less emotionally-charged terminology, like mass-shootings or mass-killings.

And those rolls of paper towels are big....real big....lots of big.....biggest rolls of paper towels ever thrown by a President.....biggest of big....hugest.

I'm sorry, but it's not. It's pretty much exactly the point your trying to make. But you're hung up on the fact that one group over generalizes/ over reacts, and you (sarcastically I think) are suggestion the antithesis of that group to do the same. I agree it's BS that people automatically jump to calling it terrorism.

Because he's fantastic at his job.

Sorry, for you to win at Nostalgia Husker Bingo you need to reference TO + Devaney by name to earn the space. Also, you didn't mention the option. Better luck next time.

Here's the problem; If he's not affiliated with any group, and didn't explicitly state his intentions how is it anything other than a mass murder? Terrorism needs a motive, movement, something political to terrorize people about before it's terrorism.

Probably has a lot to do with the guy the Electoral College put in charge of the military.

Staff has done this a couple times now with guys. Who in their right mind thinks its okay to tell a kid like this to wait? I really don't understand it. You put in all the ground work with a kid like this and he's ready to visit and you say no. At a position you've been burned at the last 2 cycles and are currently playing walk ons at....

That is a problem with political discussion today. When Obama was President, those who criticized his policies were often accused of doing so because he was African American. This is an unfair accusation. A person can have honest doubts about policy without it being a racist thing. But that is our culture today. One should be able to criticize Warren because of policy and action and not have it labeled as being sexist. Of course the old argument is that if you can't refute the charges, attack and label the messenger.

If by the bold you mean that they care about making a profit, and ONLY making a profit, then yes I definitely agree.

I agree. I think their motive is to sell more guns.

I saw this on Twitter, but I liked it. Many of the people who preach the 2nd amendment and the right to bear arms against a military or police uprising are the same people who say that we need to respect and obey the military and the police.

Sure...why not?

https://www.billoreilly.com/b/Mass-Murder-in-Las-Vegas/851098107399788721.html I refuse to buy what Bill O'Reilly is selling here. Mass murder is not the price of freedom. A warped mind would claim that is the only alternative. Are we really free if we live in fear of mass murder?? No. Quote: Once again, the big downside of American freedom is on gruesome display. A psychotic gunman in Las Vegas has committed the worst mass murder in U. S. history. 64-year-old Stephen Paddock, who lived in Nevada, began firing from a hotel window about 10pm Pacific time last night. His targets were folks attending a music festival below him. When it was all over, more than 50 human beings lay dead, 400 plus wounded. Paddock apparently killed himself as police closed in on him. The murderer had a number of deadly weapons in his room and you can count on the gun control debate to ramp up. (TG: I hope so.) But having covered scores of gun-related crimes over the years, I can tell you that government restrictions will not stop psychopaths from harming people. They will find a way. Public safety demands logical gun laws but the issue is so polarizing and emotional that little will be accomplished as there is no common ground. (TG: Little can be done by those with zero vision, zero leadership, zero passion. So in O'Reilly's world we are to just accept the status quo. That is defeatism at its worse. And he gets paid for this 'wisdom'. Where are the leaders in this debate willing to pay the political price to step forward??) The NRA and its supporters want easy access to weapons, while the left wants them banned. This is the price of freedom. Violent nuts are allowed to roam free until they do damage, no matter how threatening they are. The Second Amendment is clear that Americans have a right to arm themselves for protection. Even the loons. (TG: Loons should never be allowed to buy guns. This guy had 23 guns in the hotel room. How does that happen. Gun shops say he purchased them legally. He may have gotten some illegally. )

Hey! I'm a Fremont, NE native and...you pretty much nailed it.

I just wanted to chime in that bullets don't work like the movies. Even if you're able to hit your target with all 6 rounds, that's not a guarantee to stop them. And then there's theproblem of hitting a moving target in a high stress situation. It's hard. Like, really hard. I've taken a "stress shooting" class, and holy crap it's an eye opener. I remember that our instructor (former army, current country sherrif/swat) told us of a study that showed in most police shootings, the average distance was under 20 feet, and they were averaging like a 15% or lower hit rate. Also, they teach you that you don't pull a firearm unless you absolutely have to, and that you keep firing until your attacker is on the ground. Also, warning shots are a no-no, because you're likely to make your situation worse, or hit a non hostile target/object.

no

Does it bother you that everyone on this forum isn't all gun-ho about our current coaching staff? I could throw on a fake smile and give out a few hip-hip hoorays if that pleases you?

That's what most people were discussing in this thread before you turned it into a diatribe on 'disarming the populace.' If stricter gun laws could save just one life, isn't that worth it? At the very least, isn't it worth government funded research into gun violence? The reason it doesn't happen is because the NRA and gun activists know exactly what would happen - stricter gun laws. Those opposed to at least seriously vetting the situation are saying they're comfortable with events like today. We see an illness, we research it, we develop methods to attack it and we carry out those methods. Gun violence is apparently it's own special bird devoid of this treatement.

Don't cheer too loudly when OSU goes up 49-0. The Nebraska fans around you might look sad.

you are right. we need to give tanks, bombers, and missiles to our citizens to keep them well armed. heck...maybe even some nukes. we have the right to be fully armed dad gummit.

Good thing nobody is talking about doing that and also that what you just said makes no sense. Oh I dont' know, I think part of the reason is because the NRA has made it impossible to study this, and for an entire half of our government to carte blanche reject anything that would go against gun profits.

Yelling =/= "motivating".

This presumes: 1) Frost is guaranteed to make our program relevant again 2) Frost is the only coach who could make our program relevant again. Neither of which are true.

Dear Mike, If you're gonna suck, then for the sake of the Husker Nation, suck now and suck hard. We need a clear-cut case for firing you, or a clear-cut case for keeping you. Don't leave us in the purgatory of a performance that leaves us saying "Well... maybe?" and will leave a lot people feeling pissed off whether the new AD keeps you or fires you. Love, Toe

I''m watching some of the Wisc-NW game. We are closer to NW level then Wisconsin level and expect our game next week to have about the same results. Wisconsin will shut down our run game and force Tanner into throwing. Langs will oblige and we won't have much success passing either. The kind of pressure Wisconsin can put on a QB doesn't bode well for Tanner. I'm not sure NW will break 200 yards.