30-50 Feral Hogs

China is run by a president that has been elected in perpetuity and doesn't care about the needs and humanity of his people.  Above all else, this is the #1 reason why Trumps trade war was going to fail.  China will literally starve their people in order to get an upper hand and there are no consequences.  He's not facing re-election.

Just now, BigRedBuster said:

 

You do realize that the majority of churches don't do that....right?

Based on previous comments, I'm not so sure he does.

Just now, BIG ERN said:

Their rules are trash. Fix them. Until you are charged no one should face any punishment. I feel like that is flat out common sense 

The Wisconsin WR was, in fact, charged.  He even went to trial

The Wisconsin player was suspended per Wisconsin student-athlete conduct policy.  A person can argue that Wisconsin's rules are flawed but it's their rules.

https://uwbadgers.com/sports/2017/8/10/policies-student-athlete-discipline-policy.aspx?id=1336

3. When the Policy Applies

This policy applies when a student-athlete has been charged with or arrested for a crime based on conduct involving:

• causing serious physical injury to another person
• creating a serious danger to the personal safety of another person
• making a credible threat of serious physical injury to another person
• sexual assault
• delivering or possessing with intent to deliver a controlled substance as defined in Chap. 961, Wis. Stats.
• felony theft or felony criminal damage to property
• "stalking" as defined in UWS 17.02(14)
• repeated violations of the criminal law that raise the concerns addressed by the policy

4. Deciding Whether the Policy Applies

When there is a good faith question about whether the letter or the spirit of the policy applies, the athletic director shall decide, in consultation with the chair of the Athletic Board, whether the policy applies.

5. If the Policy Applies: Immediate Suspension Pending Factual Inquiry

I have an Iphone.  The ads on the mobile version are large enough that they cover almost the entire screen.  It's weird

4 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

All you have to do is go to the various different websites of Evangelicals, Catholics, etc. and look at their official stances on abortion, gay marriage, etc. and it proves it for me.  No anecdotes.

 

 

Religious organizations taking stances on issues of morality that they can draw back to the teachings of Jesus doesn't mean it's a political stance.  Now if they take a stance on 2A, or the Chinese tariffs, then that is a whole different discussion.

12 minutes ago, cheekygeek said:

HEADLINE: "CU Buffs football switching to aluminum cups at Folsom Field — just in time for Huskers’ visit"

My first thought: They are going to NEED metal cup protectors, but is that even LEGAL?

https://www.denverpost.com/2019/09/03/cu-buffs-aluminum-cups-folsom-field-huskers/


See also: https://www.buffzone.com/2019/09/03/04dccufb-3/

 

 

Why would it be illegal to move from plastic to aluminum cups?

1 minute ago, PoloWearingBeaver said:

https://www.si.com/vault/1995/09/25/206647/coach-and-jury-nebraska-players-charged-with-crimes-have-a-steadfast-ally-in-the-man-who-runs-the-program-tom-osborne

 

For discipline, Osborne assigns players five points each, and

they keep playing until they lose their points. Cutting class

costs one point on the Osborne scale; a felony conviction costs

five. Skipping a practice is three points, and committing a

criminal misdemeanor is four. And he has been a font of second

chances for players and ex-players, including Muhammad, whose

eligibility is up but who has retained his scholarship and works

as an undergraduate coach. Muhammad was involved in a fight at a

Lincoln hotel last year in which Nebraska defensive back Ramone

Worthy was stabbed. "My feeling is Abdul can do more good on the

field than he can simply drifting around the community," Osborne

says.

 

Hmm.  That says conviction.  I must have misheard Benning

Damon Benning said that under Tom Osborne if you were charged with a felony, you didn't play until resolved.  I didn't realize that.

4 hours ago, floridacorn said:

FYI, Travis Fisher has offered Lynum's 2022 teammate Markieth Williams, aka Poke Smoker.  This kid I know.  Coached him 2 years ago in Pop Warner, where he lead us to Nationals (meaning we beat a MIami team) before missing weight.  Right now he's playing FS & WR.  IMO, he's a better WR prospect, but I don't think anybody will see that unless Evans gets a QB who can throw the ball. 

Is it safe to tell us how he received that nickname?

5 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

What if he's texting this girl, tells an old school pal that they're talking, that person sends Mo the video, and he then sends it to her with the caustic remarks?

Has anyone heard if this old school pal, or anyone else for that matter, was brought up on the distribution of child porn charges related to this case?  Because I think that would be a pretty significant piece of the puzzle.

4 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

I'm not saying it makes it any better or worse. 

 

I'm just saying that you always like to talk in such absolutes and throw out accusations when you're making as many assumptions as anyone.

I don't think I'm making many assumptions.  Just one, really.  And it seems fairly minor to the whole ordeal.

1 minute ago, Mavric said:

 

No, you're assuming he kept it on his phone that whole time.

If we want to assume he didn't keep it on his phone the whole time, that means he had to have re-received it from someone that didn't delete it by police order, then send it to the girl?  When he should have either deleted it immediately or reported it to police?  I'm not sure that paints him in a better light.

Just now, Mavric said:

 

You keep making that assumption but it doesn't make it the truth.

It's not an assumption.  It's my opinion of the character of the person.

1 minute ago, knapplc said:

 

DANG!!!! You sure you want to go out on that limb!?!?!?

 

I mean... who disagrees with that? 

Well Nebfanatic just did.......

I'm going to say that an adult keeping a video on his phone of a 15 year old girl engaged in any kind of sexual act, consensual, coerced, or otherwise is pretty damn bad.  Even if that adult is 18 years old

5 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

I think it was awful but there are levels to this. It was immature and hurtful but it was not heinous. It was out of spite. This is a person he knew intimately. There is a strong chance Mo wasn't aware it was assualt in the video. That doesn't make it ok, but it is nowhere in the same ballpark as groping someone or beyond. Its not in the same universe as a 30+ year old person looking at 15 year olds. I think an appropriate punishment would be a 3 or 4 game suspension. 

I believe he didn't know the legalities of what he was doing at the time.  I doubt too many people would have.  I also believe he didn't know it was an assault.  I can't get past the part that he kept the video for 3 years, and then used it towards the girl after she (allegedly) rebuked his suggestions to "rekindle their relationship."  That is the part that I am stuck on.  And that makes him an awful person.  I don't know what the right punishment is.  And neither do the coaches or the university. 

4 minutes ago, CapoValley said:

Interested in hearing what a few people say to this. 

I think those who believe what he did wasn't awful will remain mostly silent.

Just now, RedDenver said:

No, the flaw is that there's no explanation for the punishment, which means it's fair game to make educated guesses about what it was for. Considering that no other players were suspended for drug-related incidents and there are no other incidents involving Mo, the only logical conclusion is that Mo's suspension was for the CA case.

Didn't all of the citations for weed get tossed for all of the players?

Just now, Nebfanatic said:

There is a difference between not caring and wanting to see appropriate punishment.

Do you think what he did was awful?  What is the appropriate punishment, outside of anything from the courts?

2 minutes ago, funhusker said:

One of the boys who was actually in the video and distributed it to the entire school only got probation.

 

Why would a kid who wasn't in the video, and only sent it to a single person (who was in the video) be held to a more harsh sentence?

 

Not condoning his actions, just asking for the sake of punishments...

It has been discussed a couple pages ago.  The person that received probation was due to the fact that he was a minor at the time of filming and distribution.  Washington was not a minor 3 years later when he sent the girl the video.

1 minute ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

Not unless it's unpaid leave.

Not all businesses do things the same way.

I get the feeling from some in this discussion that they don't really care that Washington did what he did.  Legalities aside.  Because even if it is negotiated down from a felony to a misdemeanor, he still did what he did.  It doesn't make it less awful from a human standpoint. 

3 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

Question to all of you who feel he should be suspended indefinitely, kicked off the team, etc.

 

Read the scenario below, insert yourself into it and answer the question following:

 

At a place you work at, a fellow employee goes to the police and claims you assaulted them.  Charges are filed based on this claim and evidence of you and the employee having not so great interactions in the past.  You are arrested (not at work).  A court date is set for 2 months in the future.

 

 

Should you be fired from your job?

In some instances, people are put on leave until it's sorted out.  Which would be the same as a suspension, wouldn't it?

1 minute ago, soup said:

 

And this continues to get lost in the back and forth.  The kid that was actually there and made the video only received probation.

 

Why would MW get anything worse than that?

It might be because he held onto the video for 3 years when everyone was instructed to delete it.