bills_fan

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Ap3....cnnsi&type=lgns Nice support for our Super Bowl Bills from Dr. Z

I seem to recall a similar case like this about ten years ago, not sure where. A pedophile raped the guys daughter (there was, I believe, undisputable evidence), the guy blew him away with a shotgun after torturing him for a while, then the guy pleaded guilty, and the jury sentenced him to one day in jail (They had to give him something). I've been searching google but haven't found anything yet.

Bills 16 Bears 9

Dennis, the only thing is, in the NFL, the more desperate team usually wins. After your big W vs. Seattle, you had better find something to get desperate about cause we're coming. I see it...Bills 16 Bears 9, McGee takes a KO back for a TD, Whitner sacks Rex for 2, and McGahee controls the clock, getting 30+ carries and a TD.

I too despise the slug. Great win for the Sabres last nite. BTW - Darcy said that the Sabres cap number was $43.95 mil, just 50k less than the max. The number includes Connolly. I guess we really had no choice with respect to JP. Too bad. Good to see Golisano spend to the cap and not cheap out.

Then we have to really focus on beating the Lions...no letdown. Then we COULD be 4-2 heading into armageddon on Oct 22, aka the Pats game.

I love this team. Give credit to Jauron and Marv for the atmosphere. Under TD, it became too....corporate. Now it really is starting to feel like a team and a family, the way it did back in the day!

Wonderful. An intellectual discussion concerning whether the government should be abridging the personal freedom of individuals has been reduced to self aggrandisement.

See coal miners, NFL players, soldiers etc. My point is to allow the owner of the property to make that decision. You are here in NYC. Pre-smoking ban, if a bar billed itself as non-smoking, the place would have been a hit. It would have made oodles of cash. The choice to go there, or work there, would have been up to the individual. Same as with a bar that allows smoking. There are thousands of bars in the city, those that wished to work in a smoke free environment would have had their pick. I'd venture to say that if the choice was left to the bar owner, it may have split about 60/40 non smoking. Everyone would be happy. Problem is, now the gov't told that you can't engage in a legal activity on private property. Thats dangerous.

Worst Supreme Court ruling since Dred Scott. They should be embarassed of themselves.

Failure to check the unreasonable will of the majority is what led us into the Prohibition era. I resist just about any attempt to restrict personal freedom at the whim of the majority, or a few influential elected representatives that believe they represent the will of the majority (Frist). Agreed on the megalomanics. Thankfully. I will take up your suggestions on reading. My now two hour daily commute, each way leaves me much time for reading . And I've been meaning to see Good Night and Good Luck for a while now. I just haven't gotten around to it.

Hey now...insulting Labatt Blue in my presence....them's fightin' words!!

Cincy, one thing I am is consistent. My position is that the gov't should not make laws to protect an individual from themselves. If a woman (or man) wants to be a prostiitute, so be it. I have no right to sit in judgement of that person. Whether I choose to patronize said prostitute is my choice (I won't, I'm married). Whether I pay overtly for sex with a prostitute or covertly (dinner and a movie impling sex after) is none of the gov't's business. These are the reasons where I am against any government law abridging the personal freedom of adults including the 21 year old drinking age, the smoking ban, the poker ban, I am staunchly pro-choice and even the seatbelt laws. The gov't should restrict its laws to when your conduct directly affects another. Only thren should the gov't step in to put a stop to certain behaviors. DWI laws are a good example of this. And no, the smoking ban does not qualify. If the employee is a smoker and doesn't mind working in a smoke filled bar, so be it. IF the employee does not want to work in that envoironment, go elsewhere. As Darin said, there are 300 smokeless bars and 100 smoking bars in his town, to use one example. So, the worst thing that happens is a potential employee is restricted in the places he/she works. Tough. Thats life. We all are so restricted.

Parts of Nevada already do exactly that. To my knowledge, they have not incurred additional problems as a result. It ridiculous that at least a few more states haven't tried it.

We need a return TD by special teams, the D and O have to play perfect games to make it happen. Possible, yes. Likely, no.

Ahhh...hypocrisy at its finest!!

LMAO....ROTF That was pretty hardcore...Let me go play Madden...

Post of the day!! Cincy, I seek permission to use this arguement with all my non-smoker friends in various capacities.

I'm not certain the answer either. If a person wanted to get high, and could go to the local bodega and buy some "Wacky Tabacky" to do the trick, they MAY be less inclined to go to harder drugs. Thats only a hypotheses of mine, with no facts to back it up. Folks would use them, but is that any different than alcohol? As long as there was a test for DWH, Driving while High, so what. Social Darwinism will weed it out.

No offense cincy, but in an older time this country passed the prohibition laws as a Constitutional amendment, had to enact a second Constitutional amendment repealing prohibition, then, having failed to turn the country dry, proceeded to traget marijuana as the mother of all evils and outlaw that in the 1930s. They didn't exactly get it right either.

Yep. I think if a team has the will and the ability (read feature back) to stick with the run against us, we will be smoked. We can't stuff a smash-mouth team. The only team that committed to the run against us was NE, and they ran all over us.

Exactly, where does it end? The slippery slope at work. When do we simply say that social darwinism exists and allow it to takle its natural course, as opposed to the quasi-communist police state we seem to be headed for?

Assuming we split the next two (@ CHi, @ Det), Oct 22 looks like our season defining game, against, who else, the Pats. Win that one, head into the bye at 4-3, feeling pretty good about yourself for a 2nd half playoff run.

Thats what I'm talking about. I always stay till the end, no matter what. Its a bit of a joke in my family. I never get tied up in traffic. The reason is I get back to the car, throw a few more burgers and dogs on the grill and continue tailgating. Maybe a post-game football game. When we leave its usually cause we're out of daylight. There is no traffic. We spent the same time just hanging out that others spent snarled in traffic. And, yes, I have one of the longest drives home, 7+ hours to NYC. Doesn't make a difference if I leave at 4 PM and get home at midnight or 6 PM and get home at 2 AM. My ass will draggin Monday morning anyway, so why not simply enjoy the time.

I still wonder why, when every college broadcaster and college writer was proclaiming McKinne the next great OT, the draftniks ended up evaluating MW higher. A case of overthinking perhaps?