Topix Chitown Regulars

“What's it to ya?”

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#77352 Dec 18, 2012
Ok, so not to change the topic from gun regulation, but I have a techie question.

I'm thinking about (almost sure) buying a Mac Book. I need to know about stuff like my existing music/movie files being transferred onto the HD. Do I HAVE to have iTunes? Will it being an Apple product reject any music/movies that I already have but didn't buy through iTunes?

Also, all the normal programs like Word, etc. are usable on Mac right? Would I have to do anything special bout that like buy Mac specific programs?

I would just buy another HP, but I REALLY HATE Windows 8...sigh stupid Microsoft needs to understand that a laptop is NOT a tablet.

Keep in mind that the last time I used an Apple product it was the Macintosh II...so it's been a minute.
Sam I Am

Memphis, TN

#77353 Dec 18, 2012
Jess in NJ wrote:
<quoted text>
Or maybe they understand that now is not the time to go on TV and yell back and forth about this subject. The emotions are too raw for a real discussion on gun control & the second amendment, as seen on this thread. Yes, it should be discussed and maybe even modified (after all, the Constitution was created to be a living document, not a static one), but right now we do not have all of the facts surrounding the Newtown shooter and his mother and you know that anyone leading a discussion would want to talk about gun control as it relates to Friday's tragedy.
Many of the politicians who are going on television to push for gun control amendments are more concerned with getting their names/profiles out than actually addressing the complex problems that led up to this and many other mass shootings. They are taking advantage of people's fear and vulnerability with talking points, seeing who can get the most airtime. Let's see what happens when they actually get to work.
That is a complete cop-out. Meet the Press is not a forum that resorts to chaos and yelling. And I would hope that the talking heads at the NRA - or our Senators for Christ's sake - would be a little more capable of tempered discussion than some of the lunkheads in here. And it's one thing to refrain from debate. That's cowardly enough. The NRA is HIDING. It shut down its social media accounts. It has made no statement. Would it really be so hard for them to at least issue a statement to the effect of "Setting aside anyone's personal position on gun ownership and regulation, we would like to express our sympathy for the victims in Newtown." Something, anything. Nope, they go full ostrich.

The leaders of one of the most powerful lobby groups in the country and the Senators who support them should be able to face this issue with some measure of competency. Hiding behind "raw emotions" is just more cowardice. Anyone can advocate their cause in smooth waters.
Sam I Am

Memphis, TN

#77354 Dec 18, 2012
Mimi Seattle wrote:
Ok, so not to change the topic from gun regulation, but I have a techie question.
I'm thinking about (almost sure) buying a Mac Book. I need to know about stuff like my existing music/movie files being transferred onto the HD. Do I HAVE to have iTunes? Will it being an Apple product reject any music/movies that I already have but didn't buy through iTunes?
Also, all the normal programs like Word, etc. are usable on Mac right? Would I have to do anything special bout that like buy Mac specific programs?
I would just buy another HP, but I REALLY HATE Windows 8...sigh stupid Microsoft needs to understand that a laptop is NOT a tablet.
Keep in mind that the last time I used an Apple product it was the Macintosh II...so it's been a minute.
I went from Windows to a Mac, and as long as you have a competent tech guy, it should go smoothly. All the stuff can be moved over, using it on the Mac might take some adaptive programs. But, for example, if your movies are in Picassa, you can use that on a Mac. You do need the version of Office for Mac. While I hate the iPhone and think iPads are a waste, I love my Mac Book and cannot see myself going back.
Sam I Am

Memphis, TN

#77356 Dec 18, 2012
RACE wrote:
That is why I used the words "Law Abiding". You obey the laws. Dont like the laws, then change them.<quoted text>
Whoa! This from a guy who has on several occasions stated that he will disregard laws with which he does not agree? You are ridiculous.

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#77358 Dec 18, 2012
Sam I Am wrote:
From the Washington Post:
"Since then, the association [NRA] has stopped tweeting on all three of its accounts and suspended its Facebook page...."
Over the weekend, Meet the Press contacted 31 pro-gun rights Senators, all of whom declined to appear.
What a bunch of cowards. If you believe something is o.k., have the guts to stand up for your position.
Right after the Colorado shooting, both 'sides' said "it was not the time to talk about gun control..." The Aurora shooting seemed (to me) to quickly drift away with very little updates about the killer or the victims. Then they said the same about the KC football player, pausing only to chastise Bob Costas for stepping out of his football shoes to make his very basic statement. And then children were slaughtered. I don't think this conversation is going away this time. I hope not. NOT talking about it obviously hasn't helped.

Keeping assault weapons and 30 round clips out of everyone's hands isn't asking too much. Remembering the victims and doing whatever is possible to help others like Lanza can only help. Nothing will be solved. Maybe something awful will be prevented?

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Braidwood, IL

#77359 Dec 18, 2012
Saluki Rod wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok, send your kid to the wide-open school where anyone can walk in. I'll send mine to the secure one where they are protected.
Sandy Hook Elementary was a fairly secure and protected school by many accounts.

“bELieve”

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#77360 Dec 18, 2012
Sam I Am wrote:
<quoted text>That is a complete cop-out. Meet the Press is not a forum that resorts to chaos and yelling. And I would hope that the talking heads at the NRA - or our Senators for Christ's sake - would be a little more capable of tempered discussion than some of the lunkheads in here. And it's one thing to refrain from debate. That's cowardly enough. The NRA is HIDING. It shut down its social media accounts. It has made no statement. Would it really be so hard for them to at least issue a statement to the effect of "Setting aside anyone's personal position on gun ownership and regulation, we would like to express our sympathy for the victims in Newtown." Something, anything. Nope, they go full ostrich.

The leaders of one of the most powerful lobby groups in the country and the Senators who support them should be able to face this issue with some measure of competency. Hiding behind "raw emotions" is just more cowardice. Anyone can advocate their cause in smooth waters.
Articles have been written lately about the schism in the NRA between many of its members and it's leadership, which many view as extremist. It is ok to reevaluate your views on gun control and the second amendment, which I'm sure several of the contacted senators are doing in the wake of Friday's shooting.

However, speaking out now is a no-win situation for a pro-2nd amendment politician who does not have all of the facts about the shooter and his mother since the investigation is ongoing. If they don't speak now, they are called cowards. If they try to defend their position in this emotionally charged atmosphere (it's not just Meet The Press, stepping into the arena invites all of the press to associate your name with this subject), they are branded heartless or pawns of the powerful NRA lobby.

Now is not the right time to try to divide the country further. Let people grieve. Stop calling people names.

And why does the NRA have to make a statement? Have the gunmakers issued statements?

“bELieve”

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

#77361 Dec 18, 2012
Ferrerman wrote:
<quoted text>Right after the Colorado shooting, both 'sides' said "it was not the time to talk about gun control..." The Aurora shooting seemed (to me) to quickly drift away with very little updates about the killer or the victims. Then they said the same about the KC football player, pausing only to chastise Bob Costas for stepping out of his football shoes to make his very basic statement. And then children were slaughtered. I don't think this conversation is going away this time. I hope not. NOT talking about it obviously hasn't helped.

Keeping assault weapons and 30 round clips out of everyone's hands isn't asking too much. Remembering the victims and doing whatever is possible to help others like Lanza can only help. Nothing will be solved. Maybe something awful will be prevented?
Politicians like to jump on the "hot" topics to get their names out, then move on and make laws that are much less controversial. I don't think it is right to have the debates on TV while there are still funerals being scheduled. If they are not talking in 2 weeks after more information has been gathered and intelligent discussion can ensue, then it is our responsibility to remind them that it is important to us.

Legislators are elected to represent their constituents, all of them, not just figure out how to get re elected.

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#77362 Dec 18, 2012
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Sandy Hook Elementary was a fairly secure and protected school by many accounts.
You're not getting it. It's not just about protecting schools nor is it just about gun control or additional gun laws. It's about many things -- including mental health issues.

I think opening up discussions about all of these things and more can only shed more light.

First, desigmatize mental health issues so people will go get help and ask for help.

Also, there should be some way to be able to have someone over 18 to get evaluated for mental health issues without impinging on their rights or at least balance the rights of potential innocent victims and the mentally impaired.

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#77363 Dec 18, 2012
Jess in NJ wrote:
<quoted text>
Politicians like to jump on the "hot" topics to get their names out, then move on and make laws that are much less controversial. I don't think it is right to have the debates on TV while there are still funerals being scheduled. If they are not talking in 2 weeks after more information has been gathered and intelligent discussion can ensue, then it is our responsibility to remind them that it is important to us.
Legislators are elected to represent their constituents, all of them, not just figure out how to get re elected.
Oh, I do. I believe the people who represent us and also people in the limelight and in power should be able to have intelligent discussions.

It's time we start pointing out the problem of people not having intelligent discussions about important topics and just inflaming people. Those types of people need to be vilified.

THAT is what needs to stop. The people who use situations to inflame and do not contribute to a real solution.

Since: Mar 09

Miami, FL

#77364 Dec 18, 2012
Do you hear what I hear? It's the sound of "hallelujah" - she broke up with him!!!! He finally agreed instead of trying to argue/convince her otherwise. I'm so relieved.

Okay, you can go back to fighting about guns now.
;)
Sam I Am

Nashville, TN

#77365 Dec 18, 2012
Ferrerman wrote:
<quoted text> Remembering the victims and doing whatever is possible to help others like Lanza can only help. Nothing will be solved. Maybe something awful will be prevented?
Unfortunately there are many people out there that Race loves to parrot who promote the attitude "If you can't guarantee a result, then don't both trying, especially if it's going to interfere with something I want/enjoy."

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#77366 Dec 18, 2012
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
<quoted text>
I feel the same way. AT some point, we can't do EVERYTHING to protect EVERYBODY, not even our kids.
Right. You can't. Doesn't mean we should ever stop trying.

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#77367 Dec 18, 2012
The_Lurker wrote:
<quoted text> Not arguing for or aginst....
How would simply having a record of gun ownership have prevented Sandy Hook? Or are you advocating a further step such as limiting the number of weapons one person can own? Connect the dots for me.
It would not have. I don't have a problem with the number of guns -- although at some point it would be crazy to have 400 guns. But then again there are collectors who like to own old things -- historical items -- and guns can be that.

No, it wouldn't stop a lot of things but we would be able to trace ownership.

Sandy Hook is probably more about mental health. Also about the type of guns available that citizens to own along with the types of gun accessories available.

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#77368 Dec 18, 2012
j_m_w wrote:
Do you hear what I hear? It's the sound of "hallelujah" - she broke up with him!!!! He finally agreed instead of trying to argue/convince her otherwise. I'm so relieved.
Okay, you can go back to fighting about guns now.
;)
AWESOME! That's good news.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#77369 Dec 18, 2012
j_m_w wrote:
Do you hear what I hear? It's the sound of "hallelujah" - she broke up with him!!!! He finally agreed instead of trying to argue/convince her otherwise. I'm so relieved.
Okay, you can go back to fighting about guns now.
;)
YAYAYAYAYAYAY!!! Out of curiosity, I'd like to hear any concrete reasons she gave you -- like, does she admit he was too controlling, that she went down a slippery slope and put up with crap she otherwise wouldn't tolerate, etc.?

How did they meet, online?

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#77370 Dec 18, 2012
I think Jess has a good balanced take on this.

“Where is Tonka?”

Since: Feb 09

Neda, stay with me! Charlie

#77371 Dec 18, 2012
Cool, so I get both of you?
j_m_w wrote:
Do you hear what I hear? It's the sound of "hallelujah" - she broke up with him!!!! He finally agreed instead of trying to argue/convince her otherwise. I'm so relieved.
Okay, you can go back to fighting about guns now.
;)
Sam I Am

Nashville, TN

#77372 Dec 18, 2012
Jess in NJ wrote:
<quoted text>
Articles have been written lately about the schism in the NRA between many of its members and it's leadership, which many view as extremist. It is ok to reevaluate your views on gun control and the second amendment, which I'm sure several of the contacted senators are doing in the wake of Friday's shooting.
However, speaking out now is a no-win situation for a pro-2nd amendment politician who does not have all of the facts about the shooter and his mother since the investigation is ongoing. If they don't speak now, they are called cowards. If they try to defend their position in this emotionally charged atmosphere (it's not just Meet The Press, stepping into the arena invites all of the press to associate your name with this subject), they are branded heartless or pawns of the powerful NRA lobby.
Now is not the right time to try to divide the country further. Let people grieve. Stop calling people names.
And why does the NRA have to make a statement? Have the gunmakers issued statements?
Why does the NRA have to make a statement? Because, when times are good they make statements to anyone who will listen. They ride the Charlton Heston "From my cold dead hands" wave for all it's worth. They love showing off that Chuck Norris and Miranda Lambert are in the rank and file. They pay several lobbyists upper six figures to talk to Congress for them. They spent $10 million during the 2008 election promoting their message. But now they want to be off limits? That's kind of like an athlete soaking in all the adulation when he scores the touchdown but refusing to come out of the shower after he fumbles to lose the game.

Dick's and other retailers have announced they are going to stop selling certain guns. If Dick's can speak up, certainly the NRA can.

You can be pro-2nd Amendment and speak responsibly at the same time. I really don't get your all-or-nothing attitude. If they can trumpet their views when the going is good, they can at least clarify them when times are bad. Tell people they are reviewing their position and are open to reform. Acknowledge the general citizenry should not be running around with bazookas. Or say they should and explain why. Bottom line: Believing something and not having the courage to stand behind it is cowardly. Especially when you spend millions of dollars standing behind it the rest of the year.

Since: Mar 09

Miami, FL

#77373 Dec 18, 2012
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
<quoted text>
YAYAYAYAYAYAY!!! Out of curiosity, I'd like to hear any concrete reasons she gave you -- like, does she admit he was too controlling, that she went down a slippery slope and put up with crap she otherwise wouldn't tolerate, etc.?
How did they meet, online?
Yes, they met online.

Apparently the straw that broke the camel's back was that after they spent the entire weekend fighting and almost breaking up, she didn't want to have sex last night (imagine that). She said he threw a temper tantrum like a child - I flat out told her I'm glad he didn't try to force her. Anyway, apparently it's the first time she's told him no and she said she told him she has every right to say no and it's not like this happens every weekend or anything. And that's when he agreed that they should break up. Whatever, as long as they stay broken up, that's the important thing.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 7 min TRUMPTRUMPTRUMP 234,180
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 8 min ritedownthemiddle 1,480,884
Double Word Game (Dec '11) 20 min They cannot kill ... 3,533
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 21 min They cannot kill ... 10,077
last post wins! (Dec '10) 1 hr They cannot kill ... 2,900
last post wins! (Apr '13) 1 hr They cannot kill ... 2,167
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr Kevin is Leery - CA 62,935

Chicago Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Chicago Mortgages