A Illinois lawmaker is proposing that gun owners be required to carry person liability insurance of 1 million $$$$ in that state.
That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. All it is is another attempt restrict access to guns. Hope this insurance idea doesn't catch on in other states.
March 15th www.theobamadeception.net
they miss read the thing anyways, IT says, We have the right to Bear Arms. not wolf arms, not badger arms, not lion arms, Bear Arms! duh...
You Do have the right to bear arms. It does NOT give you the right to do
so
without impunity. Therefore insurance is a GOOD idea.
www.ralphsmole.com
www.freewebs.com/ralphsmole
bullishmcgee@gmail.com
You Do have the right to bear arms. It does NOT give you the right to do so
without impunity. Therefore insurance is a GOOD idea.
www.ralphsmole.com
www.freewebs.com/ralphsmole
bullishmcgee@gmail.com
Exactly what part of the phrase "shall not be infringed" does Smole not understand?
In other words, "without impunity" is directly implied in the second amendment.
Ryedawg wrote to All <=-
A Illinois lawmaker is proposing that gun owners be required to carry personal liability insurance of 1 million $$$$ in that state.
So. Using YOUR logic, if you are using a gun to defend YOUR property and
you
accidentally kill someone that was not involved in the crime, based on
YOUR
reasoning you are saying that the family of the wrongly-killed victim can NOT
sue you, or that YOU cannot be held liable for killing an innocent person?
I
think that YOU need to study the law. There is a big difference between impunity and infringed. What part do YOU not understand?
Ryedawg wrote to All <=-
A Illinois lawmaker is proposing that gun owners be required to carry personal liability insurance of 1 million $$$$ in that state.
Yea...it's pretty stupid. And I think it's "AN Illinois lawmaker...".
Take care,
Brian
... The Penalty Box | Peoria, IL | pbox.servebbs.com
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.49
So. Using YOUR logic, if you are using a gun to defend YOUR property and you
accidentally kill someone that was not involved in the crime, based on YOUR
reasoning you are saying that the family of the wrongly-killed victim can NOT
sue you, or that YOU cannot be held liable for killing an innocent person? I
think that YOU need to study the law. There is a big difference between impunity and infringed. What part do YOU not understand?
I've already defended my house, family, and my own life with my firearms.
No "innocent bystanders" were harmed in the process.
"IF" is not, nor ever will be, a logical retort for a philosophy you don't agree with.
(Refer to above quote of "IF" I harm innocent bystanders.)
Quit your whining and start arguing with provable data instead of using hypothetical, gun-grabbing rhetoric.
P.S. I've studied the law well enough to get my concealed license AND use my concealed license alongside my firearm to defend life and property.
To date, the CCW is still mine, and my weapons are still mine, and 29 states (reciprocity laws) have absolutely no problem with that.
Ryedawg wrote to Blazzze <=-
Wow, thanks so much for correcting me. Now you can get back to shooting
up some cars in your backyard.
Dude,
I never ONCE stated that I was against the law. I wholeheartedly AGREE
with the
law. My argument is over the difference between INFRINGED and IMPUNITY.
Calm down,take a Xanax and relax. I'd hate to get shot.
If owning a firearm is not to be violated, how the hell do you think you're going to punish someone for exercising his/her 2nd amendment right for merely owning a firearm?
If you TRULY believe that should you accidentally shoot someone OTHER than the
intended target while defending yourself and/or your property AND that you're
exempt from either civil OR criminal penalties, YOU'RE the one living in a dream world.
www.ralphsmole.com
www.freewebs.com/ralphsmole
bullishmcgee@gmail.com
If you TRULY believe that should you accidentally shoot someone OTHER than the
intended target while defending yourself and/or your property AND that you're
exempt from either civil OR criminal penalties, YOU'RE the one living in a dream world.
www.ralphsmole.com
www.freewebs.com/ralphsmole
bullishmcgee@gmail.com
And exactly where did you extrapolate the above statement from? I am certain as hell it wasn't from anything I said.
Citing what I said:
"how the hell do you think you're going to punish someone for exercising his/her 2nd amendment right for merely owning a firearm?"
Let's review. I said OWNING a firearm. OWNING a firearm should NEVER be punished. I have ALWAYS said that, and I have not said otherwise.
Somehow, someway, you seem to correlate OWNING a firearm is somehow equivalent (or directly related) to SHOOTING INNOCENT BYSTANDERS.
If you genuinely believe those two statements are the same, then you have no business debating 2nd amendment rights.
Back to your original statement of insurance for weapons owners: Insurance for weapons holders is stupid. It is another way of government to control the common citizen from otherwise legally owning a firearm for lawful uses. (SUCH AS SELF DEFENSE.)
Requiring $1 million insurance for weapons holders ensures that only the rich have guns, and the "common folk" (90+ percent of the population) does not.
Who in this room (besides Digital Man) can legitimately afford a $1 million insurance policy for ANYTHING?
Who in this room (besides Digital Man) can legitimately afford a $1 million insurance policy for ANYTHING?
Who in this room (besides Digital Man) can legitimately afford a $1 million
insurance policy for ANYTHING?
What makes you think *I* can? :-)
Requiring $1 million insurance for weapons holders ensures that only the rich have guns, and the "common folk" (90+ percent of the population) does not.
Who in this room (besides Digital Man) can legitimately afford a $1 million insurance policy for ANYTHING?
Who in this room (besides Digital Man) can legitimately afford a $1 million insurance policy for ANYTHING?
What makes you think *I* can? :-)
Who in this room (besides Digital Man) can legitimately afford a $1 million
insurance policy for ANYTHING?
What makes you think *I* can? :-)
Most of us here are professional computer nerds.
You're the only one with international notoriety, and therefore run the
most "risk" for being much richer than the rest of us.
Re: Re: Smole's knowledge on the 2nd amendment.
By: Digital Man to Gandolf on Mon Feb 23 2009 03:11 pm
Who in this room (besides Digital Man) can legitimately afford a $1 million insurance policy for ANYTHING?
What makes you think *I* can? :-)
Cause your home was insured last year? :-)
Most of us here are professional computer nerds.
You're the only one with international notoriety, and therefore run the most "risk" for being much richer than the rest of us.
Most of us here are professional computer nerds.the
You're the only one with international notoriety, and therefore run
most "risk" for being much richer than the rest of us.
Last time I checked,Synch was open-source. How exactly does open-source software make one a millionaire?
Hmm.. :-)
Nah. Notoriety does not always equal income, and I think that's
particularly
true for hobby "industries" such as ours.
Gandolf wrote to All <=-
Requiring $1 million insurance for weapons holders ensures that only
the rich have guns, and the "common folk" (90+ percent of the
population) does not.
Who in this room (besides Digital Man) can legitimately afford a $1 million insurance policy for ANYTHING?
I've wondered, being from Illinois, just what a $1M insurance policy
would cost. Alex Trebek is often soliciting money for big Life policies from some company during the Price is Right. It seems that the payments
are reasonably low. Just what, exactly, does a $1M insurance policy come
to in monthly payments? I don't support it, I just wonder what they'll
be demanding from me eventually.
Re: Re: Smole's knowledge on
By: Blazzze to Gandolf on Wed Feb 25 2009 03:38 pm
I've wondered, being from Illinois, just what a $1M insurance policy would cost. Alex Trebek is often soliciting money for big Life policies from some company during the Price is Right. It seems that the payments are reasonably low. Just what, exactly, does a $1M insurance policy come to in monthly payments? I don't support it, I just wonder what they'll be demanding from me eventually.
Met Life sells it starting at $17/mo.
Re: Re: Smole's knowledge on
By: Deuce to Blazzze on Thu Feb 26 2009 06:25 pm
Re: Re: Smole's knowledge on
By: Blazzze to Gandolf on Wed Feb 25 2009 03:38 pm
I've wondered, being from Illinois, just what a $1M insurance policy would cost. Alex Trebek is often soliciting money for big Life polici from some company during the Price is Right. It seems that the paymen are reasonably low. Just what, exactly, does a $1M insurance policy c to in monthly payments? I don't support it, I just wonder what they'l be demanding from me eventually.
Met Life sells it starting at $17/mo.
Damn! Even Ryedawg can afford that even with his salary as a goat-blower.
www.ralphsmole.com
www.freewebs.com/ralphsmole
bullishmcgee@gmail.com
Met Life sells it starting at $17/mo.
Damn! Even Ryedawg can afford that even with his salary as a
goat-blower.
www.ralphsmole.com
www.freewebs.com/ralphsmole
bullishmcgee@gmail.com
You can think what you want. At least my family isn't trailer trash. I had
a
good laugh looking at your site. Haven't laughed that hard in a while.
Re: Re: Smole's knowledge on
By: Smole to Deuce on Fri Feb 27 2009 03:02 am
Re: Re: Smole's knowledge on
By: Deuce to Blazzze on Thu Feb 26 2009 06:25 pm
Re: Re: Smole's knowledge on
By: Blazzze to Gandolf on Wed Feb 25 2009 03:38 pm
I've wondered, being from Illinois, just what a $1M insurance polic would cost. Alex Trebek is often soliciting money for big Life pol from some company during the Price is Right. It seems that the pay are reasonably low. Just what, exactly, does a $1M insurance polic to in monthly payments? I don't support it, I just wonder what the be demanding from me eventually.
Met Life sells it starting at $17/mo.
Damn! Even Ryedawg can afford that even with his salary as a goat-blower.
www.ralphsmole.com
www.freewebs.com/ralphsmole
bullishmcgee@gmail.com
You can think what you want. At least my family isn't trailer trash. I had a good laugh looking at your site. Haven't laughed that hard in a while.
Why not post pictures of YOUR family? Oh wait,I forgot..people like you hide behind false identities and cheesy handles. I would too, if I was a racist.
www.ralphsmole.com
www.freewebs.com/ralphsmole
bullishmcgee@gmail.com
A Illinois lawmaker is proposing that gun owners be required to carry person liability insurance of 1 million $$$$ in that state.
In other words, "without impunity" is directly implied in the second amendment.
Who in this room (besides Digital Man) can legitimately afford a $1 million insurance policy for ANYTHING?
Re: Re: Smole's knowledge on
By: Gandolf to All on Sun Feb 22 2009 14:43:00
Who in this room (besides Digital Man) can legitimately afford a $1 million insurance policy for ANYTHING?
Wow, Rob! Did you win the lottery and not tell me?!??
Re: Re: Smole's knowledge on
By: Gandolf to All on Sun Feb 22 2009 14:43:00
Who in this room (besides Digital Man) can legitimately afford a $1 milli insurance policy for ANYTHING?
Wow, Rob! Did you win the lottery and not tell me?!??
Re: Smole's knowledge on the
By: Gandolf to All on Thu Feb 19 2009 12:40:00
In other words, "without impunity" is directly implied in the second amendment.
WithOUT impunity? Or WITH impunity?
Deuce wrote to Blazzze <=-
are reasonably low. Just what, exactly, does a $1M insurance policy come
to in monthly payments? I don't support it, I just wonder what they'll
be demanding from me eventually.
Met Life sells it starting at $17/mo.
are reasonably low. Just what, exactly, does a $1M insurance policy
come to in monthly payments? I don't support it, I just wonder what they'll
be demanding from me eventually.
Met Life sells it starting at $17/mo.
For guns?
Re: Re: Smole's knowledge on
By: Blazzze to Deuce on Sat Feb 28 2009 10:38 pm
are reasonably low. Just what, exactly, does a $1M insurance policy come to in monthly payments? I don't support it, I just wonder what they'll
be demanding from me eventually.
Met Life sells it starting at $17/mo.
For guns?
For umbrella excess personal liability. Knives and sheep are covered as wel
Re: Re: Smole's knowledge on
By: Deuce to Blazzze on Tue Mar 03 2009 02:08 am
Re: Re: Smole's knowledge on
By: Blazzze to Deuce on Sat Feb 28 2009 10:38 pm
are reasonably low. Just what, exactly, does a $1M insurance policy come to in monthly payments? I don't support it, I just wonder what they'll
be demanding from me eventually.
Met Life sells it starting at $17/mo.
For guns?
For umbrella excess personal liability. Knives and sheep are covered as wel
YEE-HAW! Now they can grab their guns and hold it to the sheep's head while they're baaaaaaaaanging it.
www.ralphsmole.com
www.freewebs.com/ralphsmole
bullishmcgee@gmail.com
That's your favorite pasttime, holding a gun to a sheep's head while banging it.
Deuce wrote to Blazzze <=-
For umbrella excess personal liability. Knives and sheep are covered
as well.
Deuce wrote to Blazzze <=-
For umbrella excess personal liability. Knives and sheep are covered as well.
Sweet! Do I ask for the GinsEWE Package?
Take care,
Brian
... The Penalty Box | Peoria, IL | pbox.servebbs.com
Wow, Rob! Did you win the lottery and not tell me?!??
Yeah, the lottery of "You get to keep your job and work your fingers to the bone for the rest of your life to pay off your (wife's) debts!" :-)
Sysop: | Ragnarok |
---|---|
Location: | Dock Sud, Bs As, Argentina |
Users: | 136 |
Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
Uptime: | 14:53:13 |
Calls: | 15,171 |
Calls today: | 4 |
Files: | 19,857 |
D/L today: |
84 files (7,771K bytes) |
Messages: | 1,691,751 |