BearSox Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 now, I hate trying to act like a mod... but is it really necessary to have two separate Lienart threads, especially in the Bears section? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 Yes but you were not given the reigns to a franchise, given millions of dollars, and are not a public figure. I have no problem with the partying, but geez keep it private. Dont invite randoms to your house that are going to snap a bunch of pictures and put it up all over the net. Shoot Jordan and Barkley were notorious for their partying in Phoenix when I was going to ASU (1994-1999), but their was never any pictures and such floating around. They kept it private by renting VIP sections at clubs not inviting underage girls to their houses. Your own house isnt private? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selection7 Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 Personally, I have always felt the law was ridiculous. I will never understand the argument that a person is old enough (18) to fight for their country and vote for the president, but not old enough to drink a beer. That just seems stupid. I think the idea is that 18 year olds have to go through one of the most thorough, intensive, and hopefully life-changing preparation regimens you'll see before becoming a soldier and being asked to possibly kill, but they've got nothing but a few "drink responsibly" ads on at midnight to prepare 18 year olds for the responsibility associated with drinking. Add to that that 18 year olds have continually failed (to say the least) to prove responsibility with respect to alcahol over history and you have an arguement that at least isn't nonsense. However, I still agree with you because those points aren't enough to make up for the difference between killing and drinking. It's a tough situation becasue at HS graduation a kid that's not college bound is looking for opportunities (and ways to pay for college) but at 21 they often have fallen into a routine with however they've been making their living and view a future at college as unlikely. Some also feel that at 18 they can still be molded, while at 21, if they've grown up to be losers, it's too late to change them. Oops! Is that getting off topic? Ok, enough then, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 I think the idea is that 18 year olds have to go through one of the most thorough, intensive, and hopefully life-changing preparation regimens you'll see before becoming a soldier and being asked to possibly kill, but they've got nothing but a few "drink responsibly" ads on at midnight to prepare 18 year olds for the responsibility associated with drinking. Add to that that 18 year olds have continually failed (to say the least) to prove responsibility with respect to alcahol over history and you have an arguement that at least isn't nonsense. However, I still agree with you because those points aren't enough to make up for the difference between killing and drinking. It's a tough situation becasue at HS graduation a kid that's not college bound is looking for opportunities (and ways to pay for college) but at 21 they often have fallen into a routine with however they've been making their living and view a future at college as unlikely. Some also feel that at 18 they can still be molded, while at 21, if they've grown up to be losers, it's too late to change them. Oops! Is that getting off topic? Ok, enough then, lol. Ya but they can also go through that whole regiment about learning how to fight for their country and actually go to war and kill people but can still come back and not be able to drink for three years. Everything is this country should be set at age 18, including driving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 I'm sure Steve McMichael and probably everyone on that 85 Bears team would be laughing at this thread. I know I am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flea Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 I had no problem with the pictures of Orton & I've definitely no problem with Leinart. These guys are still kids & if they want to go out on the lash with friends let them.As long as it doen't affect play who cares. Hell one of the greatest soccer players ever(George Best) was a raging alcoholic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWolfe25 Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 Yea with all the speculation goin on about this, I really dont think it should be a big deal but I can see why it is. As far as the underage thing, I went to high school with one of the girls (the one to the left of leinart in the hot tub) and she is in fact underage. But hey, maybe he wooed them with his ballroom dancing skills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ostrogoth Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 He's rich, and a ladies man, sure he should use better judgement, cause the chic's were all under age, who cares they are in college and grown women!!! I joined the Navy when I was 19 and they will let me DIE for my country but not drink a beer, Crazy! Society needs to focus on real issues instead of this stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.