• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NHL Lockout With Your Cock Out |OT|

D

DopeyFish

Not bitter, just unsweetened
@reporterchris

NHLPA release on NHL class action: "We believe that their position is completely without merit."

"We are close!"
 
F

Freyjadour

Member
Louis Jean ‏@LouisJean_TVA
PA reaction to NHL Class Action Suit: "The NHLPA has just received a copy of the National Labor Relations Board charge and has not yet been

Louis Jean ‏@LouisJean_TVA
... served with the lawsuit. However, based on what we’ve learned so far, the NHL appears to be arguing that...

Louis Jean ‏@LouisJean_TVA
... Players should be stopped from even considering their right to decide whether or not to be represented by a union...

Louis Jean ‏@LouisJean_TVA
...We believe that their position is completely without merit.”
 
D

DopeyFish

Not bitter, just unsweetened
Freyjadour said:
Louis Jean ‏@LouisJean_TVA
PA reaction to NHL Class Action Suit: "The NHLPA has just received a copy of the National Labor Relations Board charge and has not yet been

Louis Jean ‏@LouisJean_TVA
... served with the lawsuit. However, based on what we’ve learned so far, the NHL appears to be arguing that...

Louis Jean ‏@LouisJean_TVA
... Players should be stopped from even considering their right to decide whether or not to be represented by a union...

Louis Jean ‏@LouisJean_TVA
...We believe that their position is completely without merit.”
Click to expand...

This quote is even funnier because disclaimer of interest is the union walking away from the players... Decertification is the players not wanting to be represented by a union

So how does one equal one to the other? That's even more ammo as proof it's a ploy
 
R

Red_Man

I Was There! Official L Receiver 2/12/2016
The Newton thread is a giant clusterfuck, anyone here know if Obama has spoken out on it today, or have a link to him speaking about it? I'm curious as to how he responded.
 
S

SpectreFire

Member
Hey guys.

Bryzgalov decided goaltending wasn't his thing.

Becomes a cosmonaut.

screen_shot_2012-12-14_at_10.41.37_am.0_standard_730.0.png
 
F

Freyjadour

Member
So:

a) Players follow through with the disclaim, making their contracts void.

b) Players don't follow through with the disclaim, completely missing it's intended effect of putting pressure on the NHL and thereby making an even greater argument that it was a ploy putting greater pressure on the PA from the ULP lawsuit.
 
S

Socreges

Banned
Red_Man said:
Thanks. Maybe since this is his last term, he'll grow a pair and try to change gun regulation.
Click to expand...
It's not about growing a pair, it's about whether or not it's politically viable. If you're working on a fiscal cliff issue with Republicans, it's wise to not also try and push through gun control legislation. You're right that he's more likely to try something, though, since he doesn't have to worry about re-election. But I'm pessimistic that anything can or will be done:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/07/23/gun-control-polls.html

A 1991 Gallup poll found that 78 per cent of Americans favoured stricter laws on the sale of firearms, 17 per cent wanted the laws kept the same, and just two per cent saying they should be less strict.


By 2011 the numbers had steadily shifted. While the number saying they wanted stricter gun control had fallen to 43 per cent, 44 per cent favoured the status quo and 11 per cent wanted less strict gun control.

That Gallup poll also found that 45 per cent of Americans say they have a gun in their home.
Click to expand...
In a Pew poll done in April of this year, 49 per cent of Americans said it was more important to protect the rights of Americans to own guns, while 45 per cent said it was more important to control gun ownership.

The shift coincides with Obama taking office, observes Dougherty.

"There was a reaction to Obama’s presidency. There was a growing concern at that time that there would be new restrictions on gun ownership coming down and it had the effect of raising the profile of this issue and mobilizing support for gun rights."
Click to expand...
Only 14 per cent in 2007 and 13 per cent in 2011 blamed [mass shootings on] lax gun laws, saying it was too easy to get guns.
Click to expand...
 
S

SpectreFire

Member
I think the bigger priority isn't better gun regulation, but better mental illness treatment in the US. You can restrict guns all you want, but you still have the issue of people with mass murder tendencies walking around completely untreated. They'll find some way to kill people, gun or not.

The problem with that though, is no one wants to touch mental illness at all, because it is a literal albatross of an issue to tackle. The amount of resources to properly address and fix it, is enormous, and no government wants to pour billions of dollars, to help mentally ill people.
 
R

Red_Man

I Was There! Official L Receiver 2/12/2016
Socreges said:
You're right that he's more likely to try something, though, since he doesn't have to worry about re-election. But I'm pessimistic that anything can or will be done
Click to expand...
I seriously doubt he could get anything done, but even standing up for it, and making a serious statement about it could be big.
SpectreFire said:
I think the bigger priority isn't better gun regulation, but better mental illness treatment in the US.
Click to expand...
Really? Yea the treatment and diagnosis of mental illness is a problem and needs to be re-evaluated, but saying it should be a bigger priority then gun regulation is ridiculous.
 
S

SpectreFire

Member
Red_Man said:
Really? Yea the treatment and diagnosis of mental illness is a problem and needs to be re-evaluated, but saying it should be a bigger priority then gun regulation is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Guns don't make people commit mass murder, they help facilitate it. Untreated mental illness is what makes people do it. At the end of the day, guns are just a tool, a horribly efficient one, but a tool nonetheless. The stabbing in China today was a perfect example of this. China doesn't have a gun problem at all, but they do have a severe problem with mentally ill people committing mass violence. You don't need a gun to kill or injure a lot of people, you just need the mentality to do it.

That's why I think the real issue is mental illness. Remove all the guns in the US, and you're still left with thousands of people who have an urge to commit horrible acts of violence. They'll just use other things to do it. Don't get me wrong, I think the gun culture in the US is a huge problem, but I think it's a symptom and not the source of all this mass violence. The source are the mentally ill, they develop their urge to commit violence, and if they can't access a gun, they'll make a bomb, or just take a knife and start stabbing people. Taking away one of their tools to commit violence is just putting a bandage on the problem.
 
R

Red_Man

I Was There! Official L Receiver 2/12/2016
No one died in the China incident though. Gun control is a much more manageable issue at this point. Mental illness definitely needs to be addressed in a more effective way, but in the short term limiting the types of guns, amount of guns and who can buy them is a quicker way to reduce this problem. The gun culture in the US also promotes and facilitates violence.
 
S

Socreges

Banned
SpectreFire said:
I think the bigger priority isn't better gun regulation, but better mental illness treatment in the US. You can restrict guns all you want, but you still have the issue of people with mass murder tendencies walking around completely untreated. They'll find some way to kill people, gun or not.

The problem with that though, is no one wants to touch mental illness at all, because it is a literal albatross of an issue to tackle. The amount of resources to properly address and fix it, is enormous, and no government wants to pour billions of dollars, to help mentally ill people.
Click to expand...
I think the bigger priority isn't better mental illness treatment in the US, but better gun regulation in the US. You can treat mental illness to some extent, but you'll still have the issue of people with mental problems being able to easily acquire pistols, shotguns and semi-automatics.

I don't know which investment is more likely to curb mass shootings, personally. I think both mental health and gun ownership need to be addressed.

SpectreFire said:
Guns don't make people commit mass murder, they help facilitate it. Untreated mental illness is what makes people do it. At the end of the day, guns are just a tool, a horribly efficient one, but a tool nonetheless. The stabbing in China today was a perfect example of this. China doesn't have a gun problem at all, but they do have a severe problem with mentally ill people committing mass violence. You don't need a gun to kill or injure a lot of people, you just need the mentality to do it.
Click to expand...
A perfect example of what? It serves as a controlled experiment for us to make comparisons in order to illustrate the importance of gun regulation.

US: lax gun control laws, crazed man attacks children, possesses guns, 27+ people dead
China: strong gun control laws, crazed man attacks children, possesses knife, 20+ people injured
 
S

SpectreFire

Member
Socreges said:
A perfect example of what? It serves as a controlled experiment for us to make comparisons in order to illustrate the importance of gun regulation.

US: lax gun control laws, crazed man attacks children, possesses guns, 27+ people dead
China: strong gun control laws, crazed man attacks children, possesses knife, 20+ people injured
Click to expand...
It's not the first time this happened in China though. Hell, it's been a widely documented epidemic over there over the past 2 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_attacks_in_China_(2010–2011)

21 people have been killed over the prior 6 incidents, 90 more injured. And that's just the numbers from attacks on preschool or elementary schools. There's been plenty more on university campuses, etc.

My other fear is that how the how do you implement gun control in a country so filled and obsessed with guns? The people that I feel are the ones who need the most mental treatment, are the ones who buy and stockpile mass amounts of weapons. If the government comes and takes away guns from people deemed mentally ill, they're the first on the list, and they'll likely be the first ones to lash out violently.

Even if you safely implement gun restrictions at retailers, that culture still exists, and it'll take generations for it to go away, as well as the millions of guns that are sure to go underground once restrictions are in place. Look how easy it is to acquire illegal drugs, acquiring illegal handguns could be just as easy.

Gun control is easier than solving mental illness, but it's still hard as hell in a gun as gun crazed as the US, and that's a big issue. How do you tell a country, where a huge portion of the population thinks owning a tool made solely for the purpose of snuffing out life is an inalienable right?
 
R

Red_Man

I Was There! Official L Receiver 2/12/2016
SpectreFire said:
My other fear is that how the how do you implement gun control in a country so filled and obsessed with guns? The people that I feel are the ones who need the most mental treatment, are the ones who buy and stockpile mass amounts of weapons. If the government comes and takes away guns from people deemed mentally ill, they're the first on the list, and they'll likely be the first ones to lash out violently.

Even if you safely implement gun restrictions at retailers, that culture still exists, and it'll take generations for it to go away, as well as the millions of guns that are sure to go underground once restrictions are in place. Look how easy it is to acquire illegal drugs, acquiring illegal handguns could be just as easy.
Click to expand...
You're making it sound like improving the process of diagnosing and helping those with mental illness will be any easier to regulating gun control? At the end of the day, you can't force someone to go seek out or talk to someone. People will still find ways to commit acts of violence but making it incredibly hard to acquire an assault weapon as opposed to incredibly easy would make change a lot of scenarios. You're making this mental illness business sound so easy. Even if you improve the ability to identify and diagnosis it, you're still dependent on the person to help themselves. The guy in Newton was apparently quiet and to himself, you think if you corner him and tell him you think he's fucked up he's going to go in for help?
 
S

SpectreFire

Member
I made it very clear that treating mental illness is terrifying hard and expensive to do and that gun control is a lot easier by comparison, but I'm saying that at the end of the day, you still need to solve mental illness, because that is the root of the problem here.
 
S

Socreges

Banned
SpectreFire said:
It's not the first time this happened in China though. Hell, it's been a widely documented epidemic over there over the past 2 years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_attacks_in_China_(2010–2011)

21 people have been killed over the prior 6 incidents, 90 more injured. And that's just the numbers from attacks on preschool or elementary schools. There's been plenty more on university campuses, etc.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm aware. What's your point? If those individuals had access to guns, many, many more people would be dead. Not to mention that there could potentially have been even more incidents since gun violence is more detached than knife violence.

SpectreFire said:
My other fear is that how the how do you implement gun control in a country so filled and obsessed with guns? The people that I feel are the ones who need the most mental treatment, are the ones who buy and stockpile mass amounts of weapons. If the government comes and takes away guns from people deemed mentally ill, they're the first on the list, and they'll likely be the first ones to lash out violently.

Even if you safely implement gun restrictions at retailers, that culture still exists, and it'll take generations for it to go away, as well as the millions of guns that are sure to go underground once restrictions are in place. Look how easy it is to acquire illegal drugs, acquiring illegal handguns could be just as easy.
Click to expand...
Change is never easy or quick.
 
R

Red_Man

I Was There! Official L Receiver 2/12/2016
How in the fuck does Craig Button have a job at TSN? Here's his top 30 prospects in hockey:

http://www.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=9601

1. Justin Schultz
2. Evgeny Kuznetsov
3. Vladimir Tarasenko
4. Morgan Rielly
5. Nail Yakupov
6. Alex Galchenyuk
7. Mark Scheifele
8. Sven Baertschi
9. Jonathan Huberdeau
10. Ryan Strome
11. Brett Ritchie
12. Dougie Hamilton
13. Mikael Granlund
14. Nick Bjugstad
15. Malcolm Subban
16. Jakob Silfverberg
17. Jonas Brodin
18. Oscar Klefbom
19. Calle Jarnkrok
20. John Gaudreau
21. Jacob Trouba
22. Austin Watson
23. Mika Zibanejad
24. Andrei Vasilevski
25. Hampus Lindholm
26. Ryan Muray
27. Filip Forsberg
28. Mikhail Grigorenko
29. Jaden Schwartz
30. Boone Jenner

Schultz above Tarasenko, Kuznetsov, Yakupov and Galchenyuk?

Rielly above Hamilton, Yakupov, Galchenyuk, Huberdeau and Strome?

LOOOOOOOOL

What a clown
 
F

Freyjadour

Member
Copy of the complaint / lawsuit:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl-lockout/2012/12/14/nhlvsnhlpa.pdf

Using the tweets of Fehr support mentioned earlier as proof that players are not unhappy with Union leadership and that, combined with interviews and tweets of players mentioning decert/disclaim as bargaining/negotiation tool, any attempt to disclaim is a ploy and should be viewed as such.

53. As in the cases of the NFL and NBA, the NHLPA's purported decertification or
disclaimer has no purpose other than to attempt to create bargaining leverage by misusing the
antitrust laws as a tactic to secure a more favorable collective bargaining agreement. This is
made abundantly clear by the numerous public statements made by NHL players in recent days:
(a) Ryan Miller told the Globe and Mail on November 22, 2012: "After
watching the other sport leagues go through labor disputes last year, it is apparent that until
decertification is filed, there will not be any real movement or negotiation. Many things in our
negotiation are very consistent with the NFL and NBA negotiations, and both of those leagues
filed papers necessary to decertify. . . . Decertification becomes part of the script . . . [and] is a
push back and should show we want a negotiation and a fair deal on at least some of our
terms."
(b) NHL player Andrew Ladd told the Winnipeg Sun on November 24, 2012:
"[NHL players] realize [moving to decertify is] one of our options and to be honest with you, I
think it would be a good one for us. At some point, you have to start fighting back. We don’t
-25-
have much leverage. We know that they’re just trying to wait us out so we might as well try to
do something."
(c) NHL player Ray Whitney told ESPN.com on November 23, 2012:
"[Decertification is] going to have to be somewhat of a reality at some point . . . We have to
look at all our options to increase our leverage."
(d) NHL player and NHLPA Negotiating Committee member George Parros
told The Fan 590 AM (Toronto) on November 26, 2012: "[Decertification] is an option of ours
for sure. . . . [T]he idea is that it forces a deal to get done sooner. . . . We've been given a lot of
information about it."
(e) NHL player and NHLPA Negotiating Committee member Cory Schneider
told the Vancouver Sun on November 26, 2012: "The appetite for decertification is much
stronger than it was before. . . . As players, one of the only options we have to really apply a
little pressure on them and show them that we’re serious is to decertify. . . . We’ve seen that the
only way the other leagues got a deal done was that the unions decertified or started the
process."
(f) NHL player Marc Methot told the Ottawa Sun on November 26, 2012:
"[Decertification] can also put a little pressure on the owners to maybe settle on something a
little more reasonable. If it puts pressure on everybody to get something done, I’m all for it."
-26-
(g) NHL player Daniel Alfredsson told the Ottawa Sun on November 27,
2012: "[Decertification is] one avenue for us to force their hand a bit at something. It’s pretty
much the only avenue to go if we want to do that."
(h) NHL player Jonathan Toews told CSNChicago.com on November 30,
2012: "[Decertification is] an option. . . . [A]t some point the players have certain negotiating
tactics that we need to use."
(i) NHL player Troy Brouwer told CSNChicago.com on November 30, 2012:
"Right now, [decertification] is a viable option for us. If nothing is going to push the owners to
even want to negotiate, maybe this will force their hand. . . . [Decertification is] definitely in the
dialogue."
Click to expand...

54. In the recent days and weeks, NHL players have voiced their support for
Executive Director Don Fehr, and Steve Fehr, special counsel to the NHLPA, said the union had
been getting "amazing support" from the players.18 These comments do not suggest that the
NHL players are unhappy with their Union representation, wish to oust current NHLPA
leadership, permanently disband the Union, or prefer to pursue bargaining aims on an individual
basis. Instead, they indicate that the NHLPA and NHL players intend to employ disclaimer as a
temporary negotiating tactic in their search for leverage in an ongoing collective bargaining
process.
(a) NHL player Bobby Ryan told the Washington Times on October 31, 2012:
"[T]he union is extremely strong right now. From what I understand, it’s the strongest it’s ever
been, and guys are really looking to get in on this."
(b) NHL player Shawn Thornton told the Washington Times on October 31,
2012: "I'm on board with the union. . . ."
(c) NHL player Daniel Alfredsson told the Ottawa Sun on November 27,
2012: "[W]e’re really confident in what [Donald Fehr is] doing and feel really good about his
leadership. We kind of gave him a feeling that we’re totally behind him."
(d) A New York Post article on November 23, 2012 stated that the players are
"united . . . in support of Don Fehr."
(e) After those recent negotiations ended on December 6, 2012, a number of
players published "tweets" in support of NHLPA Executive Director Donald Fehr and the
NHLPA more generally:
(i) NHL player Matt Carle (@mattcarle25): "Big
thanks to the players and @NHLPA staff in NYC representing #theplayers for
their hard work over the last couple of days #fullsupport."
(ii) NHL player Logan Couture (@Logancouture):
"100 percent in agreement with our @NHLPA leader for all if you [are] asking."
(iii) NHL player Scottie Upshall (@ScottieUpshall):
"Plain and simple these owners think they can break us apart. GOOD LUCK! We
r stronger than we've ever been and r behind Fehr %100 [sic]"
Click to expand...
 
D

DopeyFish

Not bitter, just unsweetened
Freyjadour said:
Copy of the complaint / lawsuit:

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl-lockout/2012/12/14/nhlvsnhlpa.pdf

Using the tweets of Fehr support mentioned earlier as proof that players are not unhappy with Union leadership and that, combined with interviews and tweets of players mentioning decert/disclaim as bargaining/negotiation tool, any attempt to disclaim is a ploy and should be viewed as such.
Click to expand...

Yeah that portion is the single most damning part of the whole thing

Nhlpa is screwed lol
 
A

Acid08

Banned
SpectreFire said:
I still can't understand America's fascinations with guns. People there just treat them like they're toys.

"Hey, it's lil' Jimmy's birthday! Let's get him a fuching rifle!"
Click to expand...

Really? The Founding Fucktards put it in the Constitution that it's our God given right to have guns so now the obese masses will whine if anyone even tries to have serious reform talks because DER TAKIN OUR FREEDOM. This country was founded on war and genocide, violent bullshit is in our blood.
 
D

Deadbeat

Banned
Acid08 said:
Really? The Founding Fucktards put it in the Constitution that it's our God given right to have guns so now the obese masses will whine if anyone even tries to have serious reform talks because DER TAKIN OUR FREEDOM. This country was founded on war and genocide, violent bullshit is in our blood.
Click to expand...
Thats pretty much the problem. Its a right before responsibility. Whatever happened to the idea of responsibility anyways?

Onto hockey, which companies are threatening to pull their sponsorship? Im hearing theres sabre rattling on this subject.
 
C

CrazedArabMan

Member
sigh...

Anyways, I find it funny that the owners and such were told to keep their mouths shut yet nothing of that nature happened to the players by the NHLPA and now it is going to come back to bite them, love it.
 
C

Cake Boss

Banned
I still don't get how they fined that Detroit guy 200k for saying something about cattle and the players have been tweeting about killing Bettman.
 
M

Marvie_3

Banned
Acid08 said:
Really? The Founding Fucktards put it in the Constitution that it's our God given right to have guns so now the obese masses will whine if anyone even tries to have serious reform talks because DER TAKIN OUR FREEDOM. This country was founded on war and genocide, violent bullshit is in our blood.
Click to expand...
:lol

Dumbest fucking argument ever.
 
S

SpectreFire

Member
Acid08 said:
Really? The Founding Fucktards put it in the Constitution that it's our God given right to have guns so now the obese masses will whine if anyone even tries to have serious reform talks because DER TAKIN OUR FREEDOM. This country was founded on war and genocide, violent bullshit is in our blood.
Click to expand...
Just because it's in the constitution. Doesn't make it right. Shit's over a centruary old. Things change. God fucking knows why people think rich white slave owners 100 years ago should still represent the epitome of freedom, liberty and justice.
 
W

wsoxfan1214

Banned
If we can drug test people before they get federal/state aid, we can certainly fucking give people buying guns a background check and a psych test. Why do so many people act like that's a HUGE "affront" to their liberties?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Nhl 25 is not coming to Pc
Drama
41
1K
ChoosableOne replied
Noclip: The Making of NHL 94 - 30th Anniversary Documentary
Trailer Game Dev
12
1K
Chittagong replied
Gojira playing opening ceremony!!
16
1K
SJRB replied
Enotria The Last Song | Review Thread & Unofficial OT
Review
6
604
Diseased Yak replied
Electronic Arts announces service shutdowns for older Battlefield, FIFA, NHL, and NBA titles
News Platform
11
831
{insert code here} replied
Top Bottom