Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Greg Hardy Has a Collection of 25-30 Firearms

dgr81

By dgr81,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

BC75 Newbie

BC75

Posted
Posted

I am neither too proud for a shovel or too unmotivated to grasp 2003 technology, and I will gladly do either for 27/hr hahaha

Sent from my LG-US780 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

 

I'm with you on this one.  I'll pick up a shovel and I think I can grasp 2003 tech.  Especially for 27/hr. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted

what i'm saying is this incident does nothing to change where he stands with the team. they just paid him $13.1M. i have a hard time believing they did that to say they overpaid for a rental. he's gonna get re-signed. cj is the one on the ropes. they stand to save tons by cutting. only way to save with hardy is to extend.

Incident certainly has something to do with where he stands with this team.

It will factor in when they decide what to do after this season is up. You want to give a guy a Charles Johnson mega deal who you have to worry about off the field?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
greghardy'sAK-47 Newbie

greghardy'sAK-47

Posted
Posted

Incident certainly has something to do with where he stands with this team.

It will factor in when they decide what to do after this season is up. You want to give a guy a Charles Johnson mega deal who you have to worry about off the field?

if the panthers want to go that route, then he will get his mega-deal elsewhere.  to me it would be a mistake to let this incident sway opinion, then again i think they made a mistake franchising him in the first place.  this should be a non-issue.  be worse if he was a problem in the locker room.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tiger7_88 Experienced

tiger7_88

Posted
Posted

BTW, 2nd amendment was not designed so everyone can have all the guns they want and have stand offs in Nevada ranches.

It is the least understood amendment in the Bill of Rights and is about nothing more than having the ability to create an army for the individual states or the nation if needed.

For all intents and purposes, it became obsolete after the Civil War.

640px-Come_at_me_bro.jpg

So much ignorance in one post.

Too old and tired to come at you, bro. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tiger7_88 Experienced

tiger7_88

Posted
Posted

Pretty sure the guys who wrote the 2nd amendment believed in the right to protect ones property/family, hunt, etc.....as well as form a militia.

Those are basics that have been part of this country from the beginning.

I'm pretty sure the extremely literate Founders, if their intent was to limit firearm ownership to only organized militias or individual states, would have been able to clearly state that.

Instead, those same extremely literate founders chose to clearly state it was the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms.

Weird. Those silly, dumb, extremely literate Founders!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CRA Grand Master

CRA

Posted
Posted

if the panthers want to go that route, then he will get his mega-deal elsewhere. to me it would be a mistake to let this incident sway opinion, then again i think they made a mistake franchising him in the first place. this should be a non-issue. be worse if he was a problem in the locker room.

Incident has to factor in as well as all there other dealings with him....when considering if he is a safe enough guy to give a mega deal to.

Give a guy a mega deal....that doesn't make wise choices....and it hurts the franchise and your ability to win.

I like the Kraken. Best DE on our team. Potential to be on the league. Maybe Hardy made wise decisions that night and everything will resolve itself.

Getting arrested for domestic violence doesn't make you a woman beater. Cops haul people away from disputes. It happens. His 911 call sounds as if he handled a out of control chick the best he could. I got no beef with guns in homes....no matter the number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
teeray Collaborator

teeray

Posted
Posted

I'm pretty sure the extremely literate Founders, if their intent was to limit firearm ownership to only organized militias or individual states, would have been able to clearly state that.

Instead, those same extremely literate founders chose to clearly state it was the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms.

Weird. Those silly, dumb, extremely literate Founders!

They did clearly state that in the preamble to the amendment. You guys want to read the second half only, not the first half or worse yet don't want to understand the purposes of the amendment itself
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tiger7_88 Experienced

tiger7_88

Posted
Posted

They did clearly state that in the preamble to the amendment. You guys want to read the second half only, not the first half or worse yet don't want to understand the purposes of the amendment itself

The second half is the primary clause.

If they didn't mean for THE PEOPLE to have the god-given (*not* state-granted) right to keep and bear arms, they would have just eliminated the modifying clause and said "The right of the well-regulated militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

The fact that they did NOT say that is a direct rebuke to your thinking that that's really what it says.

So, instead of reading the actual words... you know, the right of THE PEOPLE... you know what YOU want it to be, so you use dyslexic magic in your brain to spin it into exactly that.

Unfortunately for you, the words "the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms" are crystal damn clear as to their meaning, no matter how much mud you truly to cover them with.

Done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tiger7_88 Experienced

tiger7_88

Posted
Posted

Seems Hardy has basically been tried and convicted before he even got out on bail.

Yep.

And then the girl was smeared and cursed after the 911 calls were released.

And still no one here or in the media knows a goddam thing, no matter how much they pretend they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • strato
      That's it. How do you feel about this draft class.

      By strato · Posted

      I was watching a YouTube and it was said that scout and GM insider types were saying the NIL had killed rounds 4-7. I don’t know that I buy it, seems like it might for a year or maybe two but then those guys have to move on.  NCAA is apparently about to give 5 years of eligibility. It is gonna skew those entrants older maybe.   
    • ForJimmy
      Panthers attempted to trade up with Ravens?

      By ForJimmy · Posted

      Miller being less raw and more pro ready makes sense of why they picked him. With us having a capable starter in Walker the lower floor higher ceiling player makes sense for us as well. I agree with that. 
    • tukafan21
      Panthers attempted to trade up with Ravens?

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I'm from Michigan and have had this discussion with my Lions friends, and they all agree with me, they were never going to take Freeling over Miller.  As, yes, you are correct, they could have left Sewell at RT and taken Freeling, but they are in a SB contention window right now. An OL with Freeling at LT and Sewell at RT is not as strong as Sewell at LT and Miller at RT would be for this upcoming season and likely at least next year as well. 5 years it could be looked back upon as a long term "mistake" to take Miller over Freeling, but for a franchise like the Lions, you can't worry about the long term when you have current SB aspirations.  It's all about maximizing their current SB window over the next 1-3 years. And it's not about style, it's about day 1 readiness, and a lot of "experts" aren't even sure if Freeling is ready to play Week 1 yet at the position he's used to, let alone switching to a side he hasn't played before, but a career starting RT is going to be more than ready to fill that role for them Week 1. I'm 100% convinced that if our draft positioning was swapped, we'd have still taken Freeling, they'd have still taken Miller, and both teams would have got the OT that they preferred due to what each team needs right now and what their current realistic aspirations are for the 2026 season. We're in a position where we can let our drafted OT sit and learn for a bit, they needed a week 1 starter, for me that's where this discussion becomes very easy to understand why each team took the player they did.
×
×
  • Create New...