Arenas suspended indefinitely

[dalmations202]

Originally Posted by MavsX

oh, well good for you man. You'd be surprised the .40 s&w kicks worse than a .45 acp. Not worse than a DE though! My buddy has a .45, and everybody including myself shoot more accurately with his .45 than with my .40. My girlfriend refuses to touch the .40 because it kicks too much. I like it though. I shoot pretty good with it, so i think it's just practice. Can't you change the barrel on the DE to a .50 if you wanted to? I only mention the .50 or the DE for that matter because that gun is always in movies especially Crank or Transporter..or movies with jason statham! good work man

I am unsure on the DE barrell change.

I once played with (and should have bought) a DE that had the .357 and .44 interchange -- but wouldn't spend $600 on it. Oh to have it today though.

[Underdog]

Arenas charged with felony gun possession

link

WASHINGTON -- Washington Wizards guard Gilbert Arenas has been charged with a felony in connection with last month's locker room confrontation with a teammate.

But, Arenas has reached a plea agreement that would result in little or no jail time, several sources close to the case told The Washington Post. The newspaper had reported if convicted, Arenas could face a maximum five years in jail and a fine.

Arenas is expected to plead guilty Friday afternoon before D.C. Superior Court Judge Robert E. Morin, The Post reported. His court appearance is scheduled for 2:30 p.m. ET.

Arenas, who last week was suspended indefinitely without pay by NBA commissioner David Stern, was charged with carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business.

The charges were filed in D.C. Superior Court in an "information," a document that generally signals a plea deal. The charge came directly from prosecutors and not in the form of an indictment.

"We are aware of the charge filed against Gilbert Arenas today and will continue to follow the ongoing legal process very carefully," the Wizards said in a statement issued Thursday. "We will also continue to cooperate fully with the proper authorities and the NBA."

Arenas' lawyer had no immediate comment. The NBA also declined to comment.

Arenas, a three-time All-Star, had admitted to taking unloaded guns out of his locker in a "misguided effort to play a joke" on a teammate following a gambling dispute during a team flight.

Arenas has said he kept multiple guns in his locker at the Verizon Center. He claims he wanted to keep them away from his children and didn't know it was illegal.

At least seven Wizards players and coach Flip Saunders have appeared before a grand jury or been questioned by authorities regarding the matter.

The teammate involved in the spat, Javaris Crittenton, had authorities search his apartment for a semiautomatic handgun in connection with the incident on Thursday afternoon but no evidence was seized.

The outcome of the legal process will have profound implications for Arenas' future in the NBA and with the Wizards specifically. Possession of a gun at an NBA arena is a violation of the league's collective bargaining agreement. Stern was particularly upset that Arenas joked about the matter and said that Arenas' conduct will "ultimately result in a substantial suspension, and perhaps worse."

The Wizards could also attempt to invoke the morals clause found in standard NBA contracts and void the remainder of the six-year, $111 million deal Arenas signed in summer 2008. The players' union would almost certainly contest such a move.

"We will continue to lend our full support to Gilbert and will assist him in every way possible to see this matter through," union executive director Billy Hunter said.

Arenas has played in only 34 games since signing the contract because of a knee injury and the guns-related suspension. He was averaging 22.6 points and 7.2 assists this season for the Wizards, who are 12-25 and in last place in the NBA's Southeast Division.

Well, that was totally expected...

[AO41]

Might as well start asking about Miller, Butler and Haywood

Josh/ Gooden

for

Butler/Haywood

[bobatundi]

That depends--if the team is able to void his contract, does he immediately come off the cap? If so, the Wiz only have $35MM committed next season, so they'd be in position to make someone a max offer. If that's the case, they'll want to keep their talent around to try to lure someone (and win games next year).

[AO41]

They will def. keep a few players like Foye, probably Haywood and some of the other younger players.

But I think if we gave them a decent offer for Miller, Butler, or maybe even Haywood, we could come away with something.

[sefant77]

Haywood is an expiring and had allready serious trouble with teammated and coaches. Looks like a douche that no one likes. He had also huge beef with Ethan Thomas.

[Underdog]

Arenas, Crittenton suspended for rest of season

link

Washington Wizards guards Gilbert Arenas and Javaris Crittenton were suspended without pay for the remainder of the season on Wednesday by NBA commissioner David Stern, who said guns in the workplace "will not be tolerated."

Stern delivered the punishment after meeting with Arenas earlier Wednesday, and with Crittenton a day before. Arenas already had been suspended indefinitely by Stern on Jan. 6.

Both players admitted taking a gun or guns into the Wizards' locker room — a violation of the collective bargaining agreement — after a dispute stemming from a card game on a team flight. Stern said the players expressed remorse, but added, "nevertheless, there is no justification for their conduct."

Asked during a conference call what message the penalties sent, Stern said: "We mean what we say when we say that guns are prohibited from being in our buildings and on team business.

"You will be dealt with harshly because it's very potentially dangerous to our players, to the other players and to anyone else who might be involved."

Arenas was forfeiting about $147,200 per game. Crittenton will lose about $13,435 per game from his $1.48 million salary.

Arenas pleaded guilty on Jan. 15 to a felony gun charge after a confrontation with Crittenton at the Verizon Center. Arenas, who is scheduled to be sentenced March 26, is in the second season of a six-year, $111 million contract.

He has asked the players' association not to contest the penalty, while Crittenton's plans are unclear. His agent, Mark Bartelstein, told The Associated Press that, "David Stern has done what he thinks is right for the league. We're going to look at it and talk about it with Javaris and the players' association."

The Wizards have 38 games left in a woeful season that was thrown into turmoil when news of the confrontation involving the guns broke on Christmas Eve. The team has distanced itself from Arenas since Stern indefinitely suspended him, removing his posters from the Verizon Center. Crittenton has been injured and wasn't playing, anyway.

The team said it supported Stern's ruling.

"Their poor judgment has also violated the trust of our fans and stands in contrast to everything (former owner) Abe Pollin stood for throughout his life," the Wizards said in a statement.

"It is widely known that Mr. Pollin took the extraordinary step of changing the team name from 'Bullets' to 'Wizards' in 1997 precisely to express his abhorrence of gun violence in our community. We hope that this negative situation can produce something positive by serving as a reminder that gun violence is a serious issue."

Piper Hall, a spokeswoman for Arenas' lawyer, wrote in an e-mail to The Associated Press that neither Arenas nor his lawyer, Ken Wainstein, would comment "at this time."

Arenas, a three-time All-Star and once the face of the Wizards, will miss the final 50 games of the season.

Stern originally planned to follow his normal policy of waiting until the legal process was further along before acting, but handed down the initial suspension after Arenas joked about the gun situation on his Twitter page, then was photographed before a game in Philadelphia pointing his index fingers, as if they were guns, at his teammates.

"I felt that I should do something to keep Arenas from doing even further damage to himself and I told him that," Stern said.

He said he and players' association executive director Billy Hunter would meet in the coming weeks to perhaps build a stronger gun policy than the one in the collective bargaining agreement.

[mary]

[DirkFTW]

Is it too late for the "I'm a Red Raiders fan" defense?

[TripleDipping]

That's it??

[Kidd Karma]

I guess Stern and Arenas has a handshake deal that the PA would not appeal. Good enough for Stern to come off the 82 game suspension that was tossed around.

[GermanDunk]

Man, that´s sick. One man is loosing as much money as a well-off will make 50 years. *)

*) I assume 200k is good pay in the U.S.

[spreedom]

I'd fully support a lifetime ban, so I think Arenas is getting off easy here.

[dalmations202]

Originally Posted by spreedom

I'd fully support a lifetime ban, so I think Arenas is getting off easy here.

I am curious why he is getting suspended at all.

Guns lying in seats, but not pulled on anyone is kind of meaningless, IMO. I haven't read where he pulled it on him, he just put them at his locker and told him to pick one (If I have read the "truth"). Yes, there may have been a threat, but if he told JC that he would "run him over" would he have gotten suspended since his car was there, and JC had one as well?

A car can kill you but there isn't the phobia about them.

Much ado about FEAR, IMO.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by dalmations202

A car can kill you but there isn't the phobia about them.

Yeah, but a car's function isn't to kill - a gun's is...

(not that I'm getting into a philosophical debate, just pointing that out.)


Personally, I think the punishment was fitting, but I believe it should have been handled by the team rather than the league - the biggest offense I see here is a cancerous attitude in the locker room. If Arenas had threatened Crittenton WITHOUT a gun, there would still be general discourse throughout the team and that's no good for the NBA's product (which is understandably WHY they felt the need to take this matter into their own hands.)

[spreedom]

Originally Posted by dalmations202

I am curious why he is getting suspended at all.

Guns lying in seats, but not pulled on anyone is kind of meaningless, IMO. I haven't read where he pulled it on him, he just put them at his locker and told him to pick one (If I have read the "truth"). Yes, there may have been a threat, but if he told JC that he would "run him over" would he have gotten suspended since his car was there, and JC had one as well?

A car can kill you but there isn't the phobia about them.

Much ado about FEAR, IMO.

Talk about missing the point -- I'm sure Arenas could kill someone with a coconut too, but that doesn't mean having a coconut in his locker is the same as a freaking firearm. There is ZERO reason for a professional athlete to carry a weapon to a game or an arena in general. ZERO. Even if he had a permit for it I would still suspend that idiot for life without possibility of reconsideration.

Sit back and think about it for a second -- take all of your preconceptions about the pressure of being a highly recognizable athlete out of the conversation. The guy is supposed to be a role model for kids and he BROUGHT FOUR GUNS WITH HIM TO A BASKETBALL GAME. That is absolutel ridiculous and he is extremely fortunate to have any chance at playing in the league ever again. Especially considering he's still going to be making $20M per year.

[bernardos70]

The point is that if someone offered me to millions of dollars to play videogames every other day or so, for at least 82 days of the year, and the only stipulation they imposed was that I can't bring a bowl of weed with me, I'd gladly oblige....

As for the underlying problem that is this supposed gun phobia: it may very well be unwarranted, but the problem guns were created to resolve is "how can I kill someone easily without stabbing them." This in and of itself should (and does) create this whole phobia.

You're selling a product that is pretty much all image. It's entertainment. It's supposed to be for the whole family. Arenas comes in with guns, which aren't family friendly for the most part, and toys around with them, however it is he did. Was he gonna kill or pull out a loaded gun on Javaris? In all likelihood no, but that isn't the point....

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by bernardos70

The point is that if someone offered me to millions of dollars to play videogames every other day or so, for at least 82 days of the year, and the only stipulation they imposed was that I can't bring a bowl of weed with me, I'd gladly oblige....

Wait, I thought weed was a prerequisite to playing videogames for a living...

[DirkFTW]

Originally Posted by spreedom

Talk about missing the point -- I'm sure Arenas could kill someone with a coconut too, but that doesn't mean having a coconut in his locker is the same as a freaking firearm. There is ZERO reason for a professional athlete to carry a weapon to a game or an arena in general. ZERO. Even if he had a permit for it I would still suspend that idiot for life without possibility of reconsideration.

Sit back and think about it for a second -- take all of your preconceptions about the pressure of being a highly recognizable athlete out of the conversation. The guy is supposed to be a role model for kids and he BROUGHT FOUR GUNS WITH HIM TO A BASKETBALL GAME. That is absolutel ridiculous and he is extremely fortunate to have any chance at playing in the league ever again. Especially considering he's still going to be making $20M per year.

I'm pretty sure he isn't being punished as part of an evaluation on whether there are reasons for a player to bring guns to a game. He's being punished as part of an evaluation on whether players should follow the league's "No Guns Allowed" policy. The role model argument is fair to make as an aside, but I think you're blurring the reasons for his punishment with the lesson you want everyone to take away.

By analogy, when your local bank bars you from ever setting foot on the premises again because you waved around an empty handgun, it isn't because soccer moms/dads set a horrible example by bringing weapons to do their banking. It's because the bank has a large "NO HANDGUNS ALLOWED" sign and they really want everyone to follow it under all circumstances.

[dalmations202]

Originally Posted by DirkFTW

I'm pretty sure he isn't being punished as part of an evaluation on whether there are reasons for a player to bring guns to a game. He's being punished as part of an evaluation on whether players should follow the league's "No Guns Allowed" policy. The role model argument is fair to make as an aside, but I think you're blurring the reasons for his punishment with the lesson you want everyone to take away.

By analogy, when your local bank bars you from ever setting foot on the premises again because you waved around an empty handgun, it isn't because soccer moms/dads set a horrible example by bringing weapons to do their banking. It's because the bank has a large "NO HANDGUNS ALLOWED" sign and they really want everyone to follow it under all circumstances.

Agreed,

But in the 1800's you could wear a gun on your hip and walk into any bank at any time. People wore guns to defend themselves, because the sheriff and law enforcement might or might not be there for days/weeks/months.

Snakes, bears, Indians with bad intentions or bad guys were around, but you were expected to defend yourself.

There was not a phobia, because people were around guns alot, and people used the tool for various purposes, including killing to eat.

Now, GA and JC probably didn't have the guns for killing to eat, but could have had them for self defense. Either way.......it is the phobia of what can happen with them that caused people to make an issue of it.

I have been around weapons all my life, and fired full automatics many times. I have fired many different kinds and was a FO in the Army. Guns don't scare me. Family in law enforcement carry all the time -- guns don't scare me.

The reason it is an issue is because it is a hit on the IMAGE and possibly might cause someone to not spend money to come to the game BECAUSE they don't think the arena is safe with "gangsta" players carrying guns. The image of the NBA is riding a fine line here. They like the players, but they don't like the image of gansta -- except where the bottom line is $$$$$$.

It is about $$$$$, Stern is about $$$$$$ -- the NBA is about $$$$$$.


I didn't miss the point. The real point is about the money.

With that said, it is there company, and if they want to enforce a no gun rule. So be it.

[tony320]

Insanity Workout Results
Away from home as you can access this p90x schedule timetable everywhere you don’t must be concerned about checking your wall diary. Discussed on this site may be the “Classic P90X Schedule”… yes this will be the same fitness regimen that made P90X popular on their infomercials.

[particleman]

Originally Posted by dalmations202

Agreed,

But in the 1800's you could wear a gun on your hip and walk into any bank at any time. People wore guns to defend themselves, because the sheriff and law enforcement might or might not be there for days/weeks/months.

Snakes, bears, Indians with bad intentions or bad guys were around, but you were expected to defend yourself.

There was not a phobia, because people were around guns alot, and people used the tool for various purposes, including killing to eat.

Now, GA and JC probably didn't have the guns for killing to eat, but could have had them for self defense. Either way.......it is the phobia of what can happen with them that caused people to make an issue of it.

I have been around weapons all my life, and fired full automatics many times. I have fired many different kinds and was a FO in the Army. Guns don't scare me. Family in law enforcement carry all the time -- guns don't scare me.

The reason it is an issue is because it is a hit on the IMAGE and possibly might cause someone to not spend money to come to the game BECAUSE they don't think the arena is safe with "gangsta" players carrying guns. The image of the NBA is riding a fine line here. They like the players, but they don't like the image of gansta -- except where the bottom line is $$$$$$.

It is about $$$$$, Stern is about $$$$$$ -- the NBA is about $$$$$$.


I didn't miss the point. The real point is about the money.

With that said, it is there company, and if they want to enforce a no gun rule. So be it.

What?! Where are you going with this? Are you trying to explain why the NBA has a "no guns allowed in the arena" policy? Because it seems like you're over thinking this one a bit, dude. Are you allowed to carry a gun into your workplace? Unless you're in the military, law enforcement, or security, probably not. Most, if not all, employers don't want you bringing guns to work unless the gun is a tool of the trade. And it isn't about image, it's because unnecessarily carrying guns around can be 1) a safety hazard and 2) distracting. Why would the NBA be any different?

[dalmations202]

Originally Posted by particleman

What?! Where are you going with this? Are you trying to explain why the NBA has a "no guns allowed in the arena" policy? Because it seems like you're over thinking this one a bit, dude. Are you allowed to carry a gun into your workplace? Unless you're in the military, law enforcement, or security, probably not. Most, if not all, employers don't want you bringing guns to work unless the gun is a tool of the trade. And it isn't about image, it's because unnecessarily carrying guns around can be 1) a safety hazard and 2) distracting. Why would the NBA be any different?

agreed,

Why is it such a big deal though? Why if two employees discussed guns in their work area -- an area not where the public is, but in a confined area of your business --- would you make national headlines out of someone showing a few guns to another guy, and him showing his?

I mean -- I work in a hospital and have for several years. We watch security guards, police, sheriff, people with private gun licenses, etc come in with guns all the time. We do not want everyone bringing a gun to the hospital, but we do not make a huge issue over it either. Yes, we have a no gun policy -- but it is there for safety like most places of business.

If I went out into the parking lot, and looked at a gun(s) -- no one would care, and it wouldn't effect the image of my business, and it wouldn't slow down anyone from coming in. Same if it were in my office away from the public.

Much like other businesses though, when it effects either SAFETY or the bottom dollar, it becomes an issue.

My question is #1) why was it made into such a big deal?
2) why the phobia about guns ? (even though I probably minimized it too much)

Really I just like the debate, and I wanted to see who would argue their side of this one -- so I kind of took the other side, but it is interesting to me the difference in opinion of people due to their backgrounds and experience.

[spreedom]

Originally Posted by DirkFTW

By analogy, when your local bank bars you from ever setting foot on the premises again because you waved around an empty handgun, it isn't because soccer moms/dads set a horrible example by bringing weapons to do their banking. It's because the bank has a large "NO HANDGUNS ALLOWED" sign and they really want everyone to follow it under all circumstances.

No offense, but that is just about the worst analogy I've ever heard.

[mavErika]

Kobe-LeBron ads feature gun slang

[...]Bryant's blurb says: "I'll do whatever it takes to win games. I don't leave anything in the chamber."[...]NBA commissioner David Stern is sensitive to the issue of gun violence, and the NBA criticized the ad.
"We had no prior notice of this ad," spokesman Tim Frank said. "We think it is inappropriate."

I refused to click this headline for a while, but I'm glad I finally read that article anyway. Real life satire at it's best - are they going to fine tv-announcers for phrases like "shooting on all cylinders"? Can we make it to a hundred common gun references in basketball speak?

[particleman]

Originally Posted by dalmations202

agreed,

Why is it such a big deal though? Why if two employees discussed guns in their work area -- an area not where the public is, but in a confined area of your business --- would you make national headlines out of someone showing a few guns to another guy, and him showing his?

I mean -- I work in a hospital and have for several years. We watch security guards, police, sheriff, people with private gun licenses, etc come in with guns all the time. We do not want everyone bringing a gun to the hospital, but we do not make a huge issue over it either. Yes, we have a no gun policy -- but it is there for safety like most places of business.

If I went out into the parking lot, and looked at a gun(s) -- no one would care, and it wouldn't effect the image of my business, and it wouldn't slow down anyone from coming in. Same if it were in my office away from the public.

Much like other businesses though, when it effects either SAFETY or the bottom dollar, it becomes an issue.

My question is #1) why was it made into such a big deal?
2) why the phobia about guns ? (even though I probably minimized it too much)

Really I just like the debate, and I wanted to see who would argue their side of this one -- so I kind of took the other side, but it is interesting to me the difference in opinion of people due to their backgrounds and experience.

Hmm... Well as I recall this all started with a report that D.C. police were investigating reports that Arenas had brought guns into the locker room to store them because he didn't feel safe having them at home around his kids. At the time it made headlines but not major headlines. I would say at this point it was a big deal because Arenas had violated the no guns in the locker room rule and because police were investigating.

Then Javaris Crittenton's buddy went to the NY Post and told them that Crittenton and Arenas had a gun standoff over a gambling debt, in which Crittenton was "acting in self defense." Which is odd because as I understand it JC was the only one to load his gun, thus making it a weapon. But anyway, I don't want to get bogged down in all the details here because I think a lot of half-truths/lies have been floating around and I suspect we'll never know exactly what happened... but the point is two professional athletes drawing guns on each other is a compelling story, true or not, and I don't know how that couldn't become a big deal in today's media.

As for the second part, I agree it would be dumb to make national headlines over a couple of guys bringing unloaded guns around to discuss them, but that certainly doesn't appear to be the case here. As for "gun phobias," I'm personally not all that comfortable around guns, switchblades, electric/gas powered saws, or just about any other mechanical device that can be used as a weapon. Yeah I'm a pussy, whatever. I simply don't have much experience around those kinds of things, and a lot of people don't. That's the thing with your 1800s wild west comparison... in that setting everyone carries guns because they're safer with them and thus there's a comfort level. In today's world I would guess most people are uncomfortable around guns because we don't feel like they're a necessity to everyday life and thus have very limited experience using them.

For me, if some of the folks at my workplace want to go out to their cars and trade guns or whatever, I'm fine with that. But if they bring them into the office and start flashing them around, I'm definitely not comfortable with that. Even if they're unloaded I'm not comfortable with that.. because at some point some dumbass is going to make a joke about having a standoff over a gambling debt... and then the other guy is going to take it a step further and load his gun... and then it escalates because some people act like jackasses with loaded guns in their hands, and at best it's a really stupid distraction and at worst someone gets hurt.