Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve harris who wrote (692420)	1/11/2013 8:54:53 PM
From: Wayners	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575416

Love the pics. Bloomberg didn't actually swallow and Clinton didn't actually inhale so it's ok. Damn I hate the SOB. Now he thinks he's doctor Bloomberg demanding that you can't have pain medications. He is one sik f'er.

To: steve harris who wrote (692420)	1/12/2013 1:16:08 PM
From: SilentZ	Respond to of 1575416

>How many angels can you get on the head of a pin? I always enjoy going down the rabbit hole with you, Steve... >I'll be clear. The left's motives for eliminating the second amendment has nothing to do with children or anyone's safety. It's all about a political persuasion disarming any opposition. If you're a radical minority, you must first disarm the majority. Absurd. Besides, I've already said I don't have any particular interest in doing that. >Ever wonder why democrats have been trying to gut the military all your life? You mean, other than the fact that they haven't been? >Panetta and Obama may just get it done this time. I'm sure an all volunteer military force of 80-90% God fearing Republicans scare the hell out of the left. Except you've got the facts totally wrong. From Fox News's 2012 exit polls: foxnews.com "Veterans and active military split their support evenly between the two candidates." Granted, that was just Virginia, but Virginia was roughly a 50-50 state in 2012. Besides, even in my ideal world of civilians not having guns, I'd still want the military to have guns. Not sure you'd find very many liberals (or anyone else) in the U.S. saying otherwise. >Sounds like the argument that you want to disarm America because you know at some point a radical minority will be stopped. Not really. Your radical minority has been doing a pretty darned good job of stopping itself. >Until I see any evidence that socialists really give a shit about people, I'll listen. I can guarantee you more children have had their lives destroyed from alcohol than than were killed at Newton CT. I've said it over and over that Sandy Hook is an outlier that is indicative of roughly nothing. But just for fun's sake, how many kids in Newtown, CT were killed by alcohol during the one hour or so that the shooting was going on? >Don't throw out the extreme of having police stations at schools. How about we start with a minimum of security like you have at a football game? Is that a "police state"? Yeah, actually. I think there's way too much security at football games. But that security is there just as much to make sure that people aren't bringing in things like (gasp) food that'll deprive the concession companies of being able to charge twelve bucks for a hot dog or to keep people from trying to get themselves on TV by running on to the field as it is to protect anyone's safety. >On a side note, another example of "who you are" matters to the left. DC has some of the strictest gun control laws in America. But if you're a reporter who supports the left, you get a free pass. Even after being denied permission to use the forbidden device! The police said NO and he did it anyway. politico.com Hey, you don't see me defending David Gregory. You want to lock him up, be my guest. >Bloomberg being a food nazi has nothing to do with helping people. More people are destroyed from alcohol than drinking 32oz of Pepsi instead of 16oz of Pepsi. So what does it have to do with? >Or a damn salt shaker on the table. Who the hell has said you can't have a salt shaker on the table? Come to New York City and we'll go have a few meals. Guaranteed you won't have a problem finding a salt shaker anywhere. >27 people a day die from drunk driving crashes. 27 people died from a choice someone made to drink. "Primary purpose" is how you turn a blind eye to all the lives destroyed each day from alcohol? Manslaughter? No, it should be 1st degree murder. You choose to buy a drink, you choose to drive after drinking, you have just assumed responsibility for anyone you kill or maim. Not sure I disagree with you too much there on the last point. >Why isn't Bloomberg doing anything about 27 people dying each day from alcohol? Because the "drys" lost in 1930? Out of my cold, wet hands, Steve... All snark aside, he has: nyc.gov But that's not to say that no one's doing anything about those problems. Drunk driving enforcement is pretty strict around here. Not to mention, we have solid mass transit so people who are drunk don't have to get behind the wheel. In 2011, NYC had its lowest number of traffic fatalities that's it's had since 1910 -- about 240. And given that about a third of traffic fatalities are generally caused by alcohol, there were about 80 drunk driving deaths in NYC in 2011. Which means that there were about 160 traffic fatalities not involving alcohol. Time to ban cars? Obviously not. The primary purpose of a car is also not to kill. From what I can tell, there were about 250 gun related fatalities in NYC in 2012. Three times as there were drunk driving deaths. All of those numbers are worth reducing if possible. And all are falling. And yet I can't wait until Bloomberg's gone in a year... -Z