nfoligno Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 I knew he would not get off scott free. I knew he would have to serve jail time. What is surprising to me is that he agreed to a 2 year sentence. What an idiot. All reports said that at one point, he was offered as little as a 3 month sentence, and if he accepted that deal, he would already be out of jail. Instead, he is only now about to begin a MUCH longer sentence, and while he hopes for different, in all liklihood his NFL career is over. Anyone still upset we didn't sign him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 I knew he would not get off scott free. I knew he would have to serve jail time. What is surprising to me is that he agreed to a 2 year sentence. What an idiot. All reports said that at one point, he was offered as little as a 3 month sentence, and if he accepted that deal, he would already be out of jail. Instead, he is only now about to begin a MUCH longer sentence, and while he hopes for different, in all liklihood his NFL career is over. Anyone still upset we didn't sign him? I agree with you NFO. Also, on Marvin Harrison... http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4359721 His troubles aren't over either. I'd avoid him too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 This is stupid. Burress shoots himself and gets 2 years. Stallworth gets less than a month for DUI and killing someone. The US Legal system working it's magic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 This is stupid. Burress shoots himself and gets 2 years. Stallworth gets less than a month for DUI and killing someone. The US Legal system working it's magic. I completely agree. I have a hard time understanding how one man gets 2 years in prison for shooting himself, while the other man gets 30 days in jail for killing someone while under the influence.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBearSox Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 Stallworth hit a dude that had a history of jumping in front of cars to kill himself...thus the reason he wasn't charged with involuntary manslaughter... Plax had an illegal loaded weapon in a public place.... new york is really tough on gun crimes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 Very odd indeed... This is stupid. Burress shoots himself and gets 2 years. Stallworth gets less than a month for DUI and killing someone. The US Legal system working it's magic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 new york is really tough on gun crimes Manditory minimums are part of the "screwed up" legal system. I understand the need for public safety and all but there's no way Plax should've gotten 2 years for shooting HIMSELF. I'm not defending him either, he's an idiot. But your post doesn't convince me or anyone else that the legal system in this country isn't screwed up. Hell, some jackass brought loaded weapons to an Obama speech the other day! In that state, it's legal. In NYC, the guy shoots himself and does two years... Some of these laws ought to be consistent, I think. And they ought to be enforced consistently too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted August 20, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 Apples and oranges. The laws are not the same in every city, much less every state. NY is a city which had really bad crime issues, and thus they strengthened the gun laws to a near extreme level in order to combat that crime. In many states, if not most, getting caught w/ an unliscences firearm is not likely to get more than a slap on the wrist, but that is simply not the case in NY. Stallworth is simply a totally different situation, and I honestly question how much of the story many even realize. The guy had a BAC over the limit, yes. But is it realized he had already been home and went out for breakfast. He simply had not gone long enough for the alcohol to wear off. That is not an excuse, but just a point I don't think many realize. Further, if not for the alcohol level, it is VERY likely he would not have been considered at fault for the accident, as the pedestrian ran into the street, not at a crosswalk or even with traffic at a stop for a light. He obviously never even looked. And he ran from a spot that was basically blind to oncoming traffic due to parked vehicles. But Stallwork had alcohol in his system, and thus he is on the hook. I get that, but (a) I just do not think most who make such a comparison realize the full story w/ Stallworth and ( the laws in each state are simply very different. I completely agree. I have a hard time understanding how one man gets 2 years in prison for shooting himself, while the other man gets 30 days in jail for killing someone while under the influence.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted August 20, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 One. It's the constitution. It is up to each state to write and enforce their laws. While you have federal laws, I don't think you are going to find many who want all laws to become federal. Two. I agree there is a problem w/ the judicial system. I think most would agree w/ that. I am not a fan of mandatory minimums either, but IMHO, they are there due to the judges. IMHO, that is where you find the inconsistency. It is my belief that our judges are the biggest failure of the system. The lawyers get the grief, but I think the judges are responsible. Laws are put in place to make sure judges don't allow "perps" to get a slap on the wrist because they may disagee w/ the laws the congress set. Manditory minimums are part of the "screwed up" legal system. I understand the need for public safety and all but there's no way Plax should've gotten 2 years for shooting HIMSELF. I'm not defending him either, he's an idiot. But your post doesn't convince me or anyone else that the legal system in this country isn't screwed up. Hell, some jackass brought loaded weapons to an Obama speech the other day! In that state, it's legal. In NYC, the guy shoots himself and does two years... Some of these laws ought to be consistent, I think. And they ought to be enforced consistently too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBearSox Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 What was your opinion on tank when he got caught with unlicensed weapons? Regardless of if he shot himself in the leg or not...he brought a loaded, unlicensed hand gun, with the safety off into a public place....do you want to go out to a bar with people packing? He's just lucky the gun hit him and not someone else.... I find this thread biased because people thought he might wind up on the bears... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 What was your opinion on tank when he got caught with unlicensed weapons? Regardless of if he shot himself in the leg or not...he brought a loaded, unlicensed hand gun, with the safety off into a public place....do you want to go out to a bar with people packing? He's just lucky the gun hit him and not someone else.... I find this thread biased because people thought he might wind up on the bears... First off, the NRA would tell you that guns don't kill people. And more people are killed by automobiles than guns. Yadda yadda yadda. I've always been for strong restrictions on guns and believe if they were covered by a federal law making things somewhat universal, they'd be much more understood and things like this would happen much less often. But back to the NRA... If they're right, taking your car to a club could be a felony if some state decided to make it so. Plax deserved some punishment. What that should be, I'm not sure. But I do know that 2 years for harming himself by accident is just silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBearSox Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 First off, the NRA would tell you that guns don't kill people. And more people are killed by automobiles than guns. Yadda yadda yadda. I've always been for strong restrictions on guns and believe if they were covered by a federal law making things somewhat universal, they'd be much more understood and things like this would happen much less often. But back to the NRA... If they're right, taking your car to a club could be a felony if some state decided to make it so. Plax deserved some punishment. What that should be, I'm not sure. But I do know that 2 years for harming himself by accident is just silly. That's the thing though...any court in any state couldn't take into account that he shot himself...so you have to throw that out of the picture I'll agree 2 years may seem like a bit much but he was the one that accepted the plea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 Plax deserved some punishment. What that should be, I'm not sure. But I do know that 2 years for harming himself by accident is just silly. And if the loose gun in his pants had shifted slightly and instead of shooting himself in the leg, went off and someone else was hit on the ricochet, what would he have deserved then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBearSox Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 it ricocheted so it's the floors fault... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixote Posted August 20, 2009 Report Share Posted August 20, 2009 I knew he would not get off scott free. I knew he would have to serve jail time. What is surprising to me is that he agreed to a 2 year sentence. What an idiot. All reports said that at one point, he was offered as little as a 3 month sentence, and if he accepted that deal, he would already be out of jail. Instead, he is only now about to begin a MUCH longer sentence, and while he hopes for different, in all liklihood his NFL career is over. Anyone still upset we didn't sign him? On the Score they said in an interview with Burress' lawyer he was questioned about the 3 month plea bargain and the lawyer stated he does not know how this got "legs" but was totally untrue, that if it were true they would have accepted it immediately without hesitation, that the 2 year plea bargain was the best they got offered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flea Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 Shot himself in the wrong city Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted August 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 Sorry, but what else is Burress' lawyer supposed to say. "Well, we were offered a sweet deal some time back, but said no, and how we are getting our arces spanked." The specifics of the deal are FAR from fact, but it seems to be pretty well believed that Burress had better offers on the table in the past. Those rumors "got legs" because the leak of the deal supposedly came from the DAs office and Burress' legal team did little to nothing to quash those rumors. If the DA came out and said Burress was never offered less than 2 years in jail, then I would have far more reason to believe it. But Burress' lawyer is simply not as credible IMHO. On the Score they said in an interview with Burress' lawyer he was questioned about the 3 month plea bargain and the lawyer stated he does not know how this got "legs" but was totally untrue, that if it were true they would have accepted it immediately without hesitation, that the 2 year plea bargain was the best they got offered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 If the DA came out and said Burress was never offered less than 2 years in jail, then I would have far more reason to believe it. But Burress' lawyer is simply not as credible IMHO. But you and the rumors you choose to believe are? LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted August 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 I am not stating anything as fact, but really just giving my opinions. Thus I am not sure my cred applies. I get your joke, but hey, I like to argue jokes too. Seriously though. Is it your belief/position he was never offered a better deal than the one he ultimately accepted? I'll say this. Most often, the deal the DA offers after arraignment is not as good as one offered far sooner. It makes sense that the DA, months ago, would have offered a better deal in order to save the time and money. Once you get to this point, you are less likely to offer a very good deal as you have already gone through the time and money. But you and the rumors you choose to believe are? LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LT2_3 Posted August 21, 2009 Report Share Posted August 21, 2009 First off, the NRA would tell you that guns don't kill people. And more people are killed by automobiles than guns. Yadda yadda yadda. I've always been for strong restrictions on guns and believe if they were covered by a federal law making things somewhat universal, they'd be much more understood and things like this would happen much less often. But back to the NRA... If they're right, taking your car to a club could be a felony if some state decided to make it so. Plax deserved some punishment. What that should be, I'm not sure. But I do know that 2 years for harming himself by accident is just silly. Guns don't kill people, people kill people - and monkeys too .... if they've got a gun. I'd like to see Eddie Izzard's suggestion that they give a gun to a monkey and let him loose at Charlton Heston's house carried out. Give an Orangutan a Mac-10 and teach him how to reload to be fair. Burress didn't get 2 years for shooting himself, he got 2 years for carrying an unlicensed gun in public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDaddy Posted August 22, 2009 Report Share Posted August 22, 2009 Guns don't kill people, people kill people - and monkeys too .... if they've got a gun. I'd like to see Eddie Izzard's suggestion that they give a gun to a monkey and let him loose at Charlton Heston's house carried out. Give an Orangutan a Mac-10 and teach him how to reload to be fair. Burress didn't get 2 years for shooting himself, he got 2 years for carrying an unlicensed gun in public. What on earth was this moron thinking? Obviously he wasn't. And how in the hell does a gun slip down your pants? No holster? Another smart move. Why not just put the thing in his shirt pocket for God's sake. This whole gun thing is getting crazy. I read the other day about the nitwit who went to a town hall meeting carrying a loaded assault rifle. Jesus, what is this world coming to? How about the lady who was bent out of shape that she couldn't take a gun to her 9 yr olds soccer game? I mean, I've known some bad ass 9 yr olds and soccer Moms but none that I was that scared of. Yeah yeah, it's her right blah blah blah. It's also her responsibility to know when and where to have a gun, A freakin soccer game isn't the place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted August 24, 2009 Report Share Posted August 24, 2009 1) This thread takes a stretch before it actually applies to the Bears. 2) This thread is venturing too far into the political arena. Gun laws? Federal vs. State law? C'mon. I vote that it gets moved to a different section or deleted entirely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted August 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 24, 2009 Um, Jason. I don't think anyone had posted on this thread in a couple days, and thus is was beginning to get burried with the rest of last weeks newpapers, until that is you posted that it should go away, which made it back to the top:) 1) This thread takes a stretch before it actually applies to the Bears. 2) This thread is venturing too far into the political arena. Gun laws? Federal vs. State law? C'mon. I vote that it gets moved to a different section or deleted entirely. 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.