Hernandez v Brent

[reddyuta]

how long will we let this guy embarrass us further,this is in complete odds with Garrett's clean image RKG type.We dont draft players with questionable character but continue to hang onto this guy?.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I can guarantee you once you lost someone close to you because of drunk driving your attitude changes real fast. I have never driven even slightly under the influence at all; and everyone here boasting about drinking and driving like they have make me sick.

I assume this statement is a general one and not specifically to me.

The validity of my earlier statement has nothing to do with feelings towards Drunk Driving, one way or the other. They are simply facts.

 

[burmafrd]

I assume this statement is a general one and not specifically to me.

The validity of my earlier statement has nothing to do with feelings towards Drunk Driving, one way or the other. They are simply facts.

every time someone says they only have the facts I roll my eyes

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

every time someone says they only have the facts I roll my eyes

Lets be honest here. You roll your eyes at just about any opportunity.

 

[Idgit]

...I can guarantee you once you lost someone close to you because of drunk driving your attitude changes real fast..

This is exactly the reason why I'm so cautious on this topic. The issue is a necessary part of the Josh Brent discussion, but not everybody's coming from the same place.. My sincere condolences if you're lost someone to a drunk driver. A lot of people have.

I don't think anyone's boasting about the realities of how D&D is enforced in the US, but the entire debate's not even worth the risk of engendering bad feelings on the topic, as far as I'm concerned. I'm going to bow out of the thread for a bit, but I encourage everyone to keep the discussion in the proper context given the issues involved here.

 

[Derinyar]

Josh Brent and Jerry Brown made a collection of bad decisions that lead to a tragic and accidental outcome. The accidental outcome is such because Josh Brent didn't, in all likelihood, set out from the club with the intention of killing his friend in a car wreck that day.

Aaron Hernandez, if he did it, came up with a plan and followed through with it to get the desired outcome of the plan, the execution of a human. After the fact he went about trying to conceal his involvement in the incident.

I guess i have too much faith in people to believe that the difference between these two should be easily evident and should be visible at even the most cursor inspection. If you disagree then you most likely have some agenda driving your view of the situation.

I'll bet the Patriots by cutting Hernandez early save themselves some money, and possibly get some back. Hernandez is likely done as a pro, or at least for an extended period of time. Brent is also likely done as a pro but he just doesn't have the same salary or contract. I'll bet that at its core the Patriots made a business decision and not a moral one, that seems to be the nature of that team that they only make business decisions.

 

[TwoDeep3]

The issue with Brent has nothing to do with his status as a backup DL on the Dallas Cowboys. It'd be the same issue if he were a regular Joe off the street. His mistake was a huge one, but it didn't have anything (or much, at least) to do with celebrity. The same thing happens to thousands of people every year. They all get similar sentences, and then they all have to go on with their careers after they put their lives back together.

Do you reads the posts here? Or skim them?

There are people who are actually taking the disgusting position that because someone like me thinks Brent needs to do time, I am a troll and a Cowboy hater.

Further, if Brent was some average Joe off the street and killed a Dallas Cowboy because he was drunk, are you so naive to think that this site and the band of usual suspects here would not be figuratively getting a rope and character assassinating the driver that was drunk if he were not in jail?

The mere mention of Stallworth as a justification for Brent to walk around free should clue you in.

You are quickly becoming one of my more favorite posters here, but you just took a left turn idgit.

We are now a society of protecting our gladiators to the Nth degree.

By the way, I bet you wrote that before Brent had to go back to jail today. I bet most people wrote their rebuttals to me before Brent, the irresponsible killer, had to return to jail because he cannot stop abusing alcohol.

And spare me the line that he was grieving over his lost buddy. He is now where he should have been before.

 

[iceberg]

Lets be honest here. You roll your eyes at just about any opportunity.

how do you NOT like this one?

 

[Dday22t]

Comparison doesn't work. And pointless since neither will play again.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Do you reads the posts here? Or skim them?

There are people who are actually taking the disgusting position that because someone like me thinks Brent needs to do time, I am a troll and a Cowboy hater.

Further, if Brent was some average Joe off the street and killed a Dallas Cowboy because he was drunk, are you so naive to think that this site and the band of usual suspects here would not be figuratively getting a rope and character assassinating the driver that was drunk if he were not in jail?

The mere mention of Stallworth as a justification for Brent to walk around free should clue you in.

You are quickly becoming one of my more favorite posters here, but you just took a left turn idgit.

We are now a society of protecting our gladiators to the Nth degree.

By the way, I bet you wrote that before Brent had to go back to jail today. I bet most people wrote their rebuttals to me before Brent, the irresponsible killer, had to return to jail because he cannot stop abusing alcohol.

And spare me the line that he was grieving over his lost buddy. He is now where he should have been before.

Forgive me. I've read a lot of this thread but I've not seen what you are claiming. I've seen nobody say that Brent should not do time, nor have I seen that anybody has suggested anything other then the fact that they don't understand how what Brent has done can compare with what Hernandez is accused of.

 

[Idgit]

Do you reads the posts here? Or skim them?

There are people who are actually taking the disgusting position that because someone like me thinks Brent needs to do time, I am a troll and a Cowboy hater.

Further, if Brent was some average Joe off the street and killed a Dallas Cowboy because he was drunk, are you so naive to think that this site and the band of usual suspects here would not be figuratively getting a rope and character assassinating the driver that was drunk if he were not in jail?

The mere mention of Stallworth as a justification for Brent to walk around free should clue you in.

You are quickly becoming one of my more favorite posters here, but you just took a left turn idgit.

We are now a society of protecting our gladiators to the Nth degree.

By the way, I bet you wrote that before Brent had to go back to jail today. I bet most people wrote their rebuttals to me before Brent, the irresponsible killer, had to return to jail because he cannot stop abusing alcohol.

And spare me the line that he was grieving over his lost buddy. He is now where he should have been before.

You know...this topic is just too personal for some people for me to keep debating it. I like the debate, but it's just not worth possibly digging up some deeply held emotions for anybody. Generally, I just have a lot of sympathy for anybody involved with these types of vehicular accidents, and a lot of us have lost someone close to us this way. It's senseless, all around, and just a sad topic.

To answer your question, yes, I was of the opinion that the Cowboys should work with Brent on his issues...until today. At this point, I don't see how they can continue with him on the roster in any capacity. I still think the guy needs help, though, as or once he's done with his legal and criminal responsibilities.

More than anything, it's sad to me that this closes off the option of him doing anything for Jerry Brown's kid.

 

[TwoDeep3]

Regardless of what one person or perhaps another may think of how DD is viewed in this country, I believe it all comes down to the want of the people. Those who contend that DD should be viewed the same as shooting a man in the back of the head execution style are probably very much like those who believed Prohibition was the right way to go in the 30s. The reality is that the people just don't want to outlaw drinking and so, as a nation, we will tolerate where this issue is concerned.

Here's the funny part to me thou. It's not just the average Joe SixPack that doesn't want to see it go away. It's also every city, county and state in this country. Local Governments are making a fortune off of DWI laws and convictions. They absolutely want to make it tougher but I'm not convinced at all that they to stop it. They want stiffer laws and penalties because they want more conviction in order to make more money.

That, to me, is the sad part of this whole debate. I honestly believe that.

Surmise much?

You cannot support your assumption of what anyone thinks, or even regurgitate what they think in your post since you seem to assume the absolutes about this issue and no gradients.

First, I believe both men should be in jail. Period.

Obviously there is a huge difference between executing someone and killing them with your car. But in both cases it is murder in my eyes. Gradients, but of the same shade.

I also worked and ran bars for years, so your assumption I am pro prohibition since I take a hard stand on drunk driving is laughable.

Then you make the outlandish comment that municipalities are in favor of drunk driving because they make money over it.

So let's sort of turn a blind eye to this since Joe SixPack didn't mean it and we can milk him for ten of thousands dollars or more for his misbehavior.

Ethics in this country are eroding daily. This allowing Brent to come to a game and be seen around town sends a message to the youth of this country that some things are okay.

Every time we see someone like Lindsay Lohan get a slap on the wrist, or a Josh Brent parade around free as a Scotsman, it sends an implicit message to our youth that if you are a celebrity, or are rich, you have different rules.

There should be no different rules for the haves that the have nots do not enjoy. We have a Federal Legislative branch that lives by rules we do not because we cannot seem to come together and govern their behavior because of the little, "I gots to get paid" attitude of so many.

The thug life that is glorified in music is emulated by people who walk the streets because it is what is happening, or was, anyway. Wonder if Chicago really thinks they are making out on the fines and such with the highest murder rate per capita in their city by gangs which is ruling that berg?

Society doesn't just go to Hell in a hand basket by itself. It needs a willing accomplice that does nothing to stop the erosion.

It has been said that for evil men to accomplish their purpose it is only necessary that good men should do nothing. Reverend Charles F. Aked

Now while Aked was speaking specifically about alcohol, and I am not as fervent about the subject, only drunk driving, I think he was a little bit of a zealot.

But the statement about life is true.

The Josh Brent issue was mishandled by the team and sends a message that this society does not need any more of.

Do nothing and evil prospers.

 

[TwoDeep3]

You know...this topic is just too personal for some people for me to keep debating it. I like the debate, but it's just not worth possibly digging up some deeply held emotions for anybody. Generally, I just have a lot of sympathy for anybody involved with these types of vehicular accidents, and a lot of us have lost someone close to us this way. It's senseless, all around, and just a sad topic.

To answer your question, yes, I was of the opinion that the Cowboys should work with Brent on his issues...until today. At this point, I don't see how they can continue with him on the roster in any capacity. I still think the guy needs help, though, as or once he's done with his legal and criminal responsibilities.

More than anything, it's sad to me that this closes off the option of him doing anything for Jerry Brown's kid.

He was abetted as a college student for his antics with alcohol.

Think that comes into play now for him as he carelessly made a decision that killed his best friend?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Surmise much?

You cannot support your assumption of what anyone thinks, or even regurgitate what they think in your post since you seem to assume the absolutes about this issue and no gradients.

First, I believe both men should be in jail. Period.

Obviously there is a huge difference between executing someone and killing them with your car. But in both cases it is murder in my eyes. Gradients, but of the same shade.

I also worked and ran bars for years, so your assumption I am pro prohibition since I take a hard stand on drunk driving is laughable.

Then you make the outlandish comment that municipalities are in favor of drunk driving because they make money over it.

So let's sort of turn a blind eye to this since Joe SixPack didn't mean it and we can milk him for ten of thousands dollars or more for his misbehavior.

Ethics in this country are eroding daily. This allowing Brent to come to a game and be seen around town sends a message to the youth of this country that some things are okay.

Every time we see someone like Lindsay Lohan get a slap on the wrist, or a Josh Brent parade around free as a Scotsman, it sends an implicit message to our youth that if you are a celebrity, or are rich, you have different rules.

There should be no different rules for the haves that the have nots do not enjoy. We have a Federal Legislative branch that lives by rules we do not because we cannot seem to come together and govern their behavior because of the little, "I gots to get paid" attitude of so many.

The thug life that is glorified in music is emulated by people who walk the streets because it is what is happening, or was, anyway. Wonder if Chicago really thinks they are making out on the fines and such with the highest murder rate per capita in their city by gangs which is ruling that berg?

Society doesn't just go to Hell in a hand basket by itself. It needs a willing accomplice that does nothing to stop the erosion.

It has been said that for evil men to accomplish their purpose it is only necessary that good men should do nothing. Reverend Charles F. Aked

Now while Aked was speaking specifically about alcohol, and I am not as fervent about the subject, only drunk driving, I think he was a little bit of a zealot.

But the statement about life is true.

The Josh Brent issue was mishandled by the team and sends a message that this society does not need any more of.

Do nothing and evil prospers.

I guess about as much as you answer direct questions. I'm not asking you what you believe. You've said that more then enough times in this thread. Right about now, I'm guessing nobody wants to hear that again. What I'm asking you is where are you getting this stuff about people not thinking Brent should go to jail? Where are you getting this whole thing about people calling you a troll because why?

Please, answer these questions and then we can move on to your novel.

 

[Idgit]

He was abetted as a college student for his antics with alcohol.

Think that comes into play now for him as he carelessly made a decision that killed his best friend?

Yeah, I think the pattern of behavior matters.

 

[TwoDeep3]

I guess about as much as you answer direct questions. I'm not asking you what you believe. You've said that more then enough times in this thread. Right about now, I'm guessing nobody wants to hear that again. What I'm asking you is where are you getting this stuff about people not thinking Brent should go to jail? Where are you getting this whole thing about people calling you a troll because why?

Please, answer these questions and then we can move on to your novel.

I read the thread. I thought that would have been obvious.

You can keep your insults to yourself, MOD.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

It has been said that for evil men to accomplish their purpose it is only necessary that good men should do nothing. Reverend Charles F. Aked

BTW, this quote may not be Charles Frederick Aked's. It might be Edmund Burke or it might be John Stewart Mill. Of course, JFK said it in his famous speech to the Canadian Parliament and he credited Edmund.

Of course, as I'm sure you know, Aked said it in support of prohibition, but I'm sure you already new this.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I read the thread. I thought that would have been obvious.

You can keep your insults to yourself, MOD.

I also read the thread, which is why I asked you where this happened. You once again, failed to answer. You can't expect people to support a position when the claims are unsupported.

Keep in mind, you are the one who is insulting by making such claims against posters who are simply stating their own opinions.

If it is what you say it is, that's fine but don't get bent when you are asked to produce evidence of same. It's a put up or shut thing.

 

[CashMan]

This post is one of the dumbest I've ever read. No one is obligated to voluntarily turn over evidence that incriminates themself. Requiring anyone to do so would violate their right against self incrimination. They do not, however, have the right to destroy evidence of the commission of a crime committed by themselves or anyone else. That is a crimial act in and of itself. Big difference betwee the two.

This is the dumbest post I've read on this board. This person has quoted something that says nothing about destroying evidence.

 

[Hoofbite]

Comparison doesn't work. And pointless since neither will play again.

Perfectly said.

This shouldn't be a "vs." thread. It should be a "&" thread where people talk about how stupid BOTH of these players are for throwing away everything.