Mark Kriegel of Fox Sports takes the high road.
The real question is this: if a guy can't be counted on to attend team meetings or practice, can he be entrusted with a gun?
[Exactly. It's like when I was younger, I had perfect attendance in junior high. Seriously, I did not miss a single day. And you know what the principal told me upon giving me my "perfect attendance" certificate? He said, "I would totally trust you with an assault rifle."]
I understand what generates the paranoia: the cases of Sean Taylor, Darrent Williams and Richard Collier, just to name a few.
[Seems kind of like a legitimate concern, right?]
It's worth noting that Sean Taylor forgot to turn on his home alarm system the night he was murdered.
[Wow. Did Mark Kriegler just imply that Sean Taylor was......... asking for it???]
Nice dialogue, America.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
[Wow. Did Mark Kriegler just imply that Sean Taylor was......... asking for it???]
Well he was dressed provocatively.
Too soon?
I'm pretty sure that's a LOGIC FAIL up top, regarding the gun. Kriegel is saying "if A, then B," and you're equating it to "if not A, then not B." It's been a while since I did logic in school - 22 years, roughly - but I'm pretty sure that the first doesn't imply the second.
Keith, thanks for checking in. Great work over at The Dish (especially the Klaw 100). You are correct on my denying the antecedent. Although, a little hyberbole highlights the blatant ad hominem argument made by Kriegler (and many other media voices).
We have laws. If Plaxico gets convicted of a crime, it will be because the state of NY proved the elements of the relevant statute beyond a reasonable doubt, and not because he might come across as a jerk or a bad teammate.
The seemingly more interesting aspect of this is that the statute in question includes the element of "with intent to use the same
unlawfully against another." Fortunately for the state, NY has a statutory presumption of such intent that revolves around possession of a gun that contains live rounds. The presumption is rebuttable, however, so if it goes to trial you can all but guarantee that Plax would have to testify.
Post a Comment