F**** your thoughts and prayers?

[sealybobo]

Yep, and the only reason I own an AR style rifle is to address a wild hog problem. I take exception to them tearing up my property.

.

I'm glad we don't have hogs on our property, yet. Just Coyote and Bobcats. We need to kill the Coyote. It will improve deer population.

 

[OKTexas]

You're wrong. Republicans give the rich tax breaks. Then they need to cut social security or raise the retirement age. The rich and politicians on both sides raid social security funds. Blablabla.

So when you have to take a cut to something you care about, or your local taxes go up because rich people got Republicans to pass tax breaks, yes, it does affect you very much.

Back in my dad's day, the gap between workers and CEO wasn't so wide. And people like my dad had good lives. Today the gap is much wider and jobs like my dad's don't exist anymore. Because of rich people's policies. Policies you'll say Democrats endorsed and I'll say Republicans.

But you're wrong to think it didn't affect your life.

Imagine if you were told retirement was 65 and in your work lifetime they raised it to 67. I think that happened to me. I didn't realize it back then, thanks Reagan, but making me work an extra 2 years is a BIG DEAL. I'd rather you raise my taxes than raise my retirement age.

The only one that determines when you retire is you. Of course it take some preparation and planning. I retired at 60 and could have done it earlier had I chose to do so.

.

 

[jc456]

Huh? We put money in, there should be money in the fund. Not my fault Republicans raided the fund and used it like a slush fund. They owe me my money

Simp, money in money out, there’s no funds!!

 

[jc456]

You're wrong. Republicans give the rich tax breaks. Then they need to cut social security or raise the retirement age. The rich and politicians on both sides raid social security funds. Blablabla.

What is a tax break?

 

[Lesh]

The law abiding citizens who have guns are safer.

The kids in Sandy Hook, Michigan State, Parkland, Vegas, Buffalo and a hundred other mass murder sites were law abiding and not safe at ALL

 

[Lesh]

Huh? We put money in, there should be money in the fund. Not my fault Republicans raided the fund and used it like a slush fund. They owe me my money.

You ought to know better.

Excess funds are deducted from payroll. Those excess funds are "borrowed" from the Trust Fund and Special T Bills issued. That money then goes into the General Fund and is paid back OUT of the General Fund when the T Bills come due.

It's not been raided. It's not a slush fund. That's HOW the system was set up because there is no other way to handle those excess funds

 

[jc456]

The kids in Sandy Hook, Michigan State, Parkland, Vegas, Buffalo and a hundred other mass murder sites were law abiding and not safe at ALL

What law abiding gun owners did?

 

[OKTexas]

Name them?

Here you go numnuts

Who were the victims of the Texas church shooting?

The victims of Sunday's Sutherland Springs massacre ranged from just 18 months old to 77. Here is what we know about them.

www.nbcnews.com

Your refusal to accept reasonable gun control led to those murders among thousands more.

Each and every one on your head.

You failed again, I've never been there, so there is no direct connection. And how about you explain why mass shootings were very rare before all the current gun laws were passed.

.

 

[OKTexas]

I'm glad we don't have hogs on our property, yet. Just Coyote and Bobcats. We need to kill the Coyote. It will improve deer population.

We have a very health deer population and I hear coyotes occasionally. I don't think there is a major problem with them.

.

 

[Chillicothe]

"....why isn't it the person holding said gun?"

'said person'.... is liable. Duh!.
My poor avatar was clear on that. At least, to most readers.
The OOR---Owner-of-Record ----shares the liability with others for the dead 17yr old behind the Waffle House counter.

I will continue to try to be clearer for some here.
The primary actor here....is the trigger-puller.
One of the subsidiary, accessory, or contributing actors is the OOR.
It was, after all, his gun that was used.
He doesn't get off Scott-free.
He owns a portion of the harm.
Duh!
---------------------------------------------

Registration will allow tracking guns to their owners
Background checks will allow for determining whether transfers are performed legally

Which brings us right back to "strict liability".
ALL owners-of-record will be incentivized to get that 'strict liability' burden off of their account.
It's a gun....and it will now come burdened with an immense amount of responsibility and liability. On the record.
Legally transfer it to another.....and the liability is gone.
But, it must always rest upon whoever is the OOR.

Background checks are already done for most gun purchases and some states require them for private purchases. And if I own a gun which is my right then it's none of your or the government's business.

Well, actually....it is 'society's' business. A high lethality/easily concealed and portable tool is society's business due to the potential harm it can...and has proven to cause.
Thus, strict registration of the OOR, and any subsequent OOR's of that tool......will help society fix part of the liability when the use of that tool causes harm.
-------------------------------------------------

What good is a background check if they don’t know who’s purchasing the gun?

Ummm, the OOR is the purchaser of the gun. Ipso facto. By definition.
Strict registration and background checks establishes who is the current OOR. Any subsequent OOR's of that same tool....are burdened with the liability, of course ---- but also the bureaucratic requirement of vetting and registering.
Duh!
------------------------------------------------

 

[Chillicothe]

It will improve deer population.

Well, poster Sealybobo.....you really must read Dana Millbank's column in this morning's Washington Post:

" I bought a gun — and I intend to use it"
Millbank makes a persuasive case that North America's deer population needs a severe pruning. And his newly purchased .30-06 is part of the solution.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/02/17/deer-menace-guns-hunting/

 

[jc456]

'said person'.... is liable. Duh!.
My poor avatar was clear on that. At least, to most readers.
The OOR---Owner-of-Record ----shares the liability with others for the dead 17yr old behind the Waffle House counter.

I will continue to try to be clearer for some here.
The primary actor here....is the trigger-puller.
One of the subsidiary, accessory, or contributing actors is the OOR.
It was, after all, his gun that was used.
He doesn't get off Scott-free.
He owns a portion of the harm.
Duh!
---------------------------------------------


Which brings us right back to "strict liability".
ALL owners-of-record will be incentivized to get that 'strict liability' burden off of their account.
It's a gun....and it will now come burdened with an immense amount of responsibility and liability. On the record.
Legally transfer it to another.....and the liability is gone.
But, it must always rest upon whoever is the OOR.


Well, actually....it is 'society's' business. A high lethality/easily concealed and portable tool is society's business due to the potential harm it can...and has proven to cause.
Thus, strict registration of the OOR, and any subsequent OOR's of that tool......will help society fix part of the liability when the use of that tool causes harm.
-------------------------------------------------

Ummm, the OOR is the purchaser of the gun. Ipso facto. By definition.
Strict registration and background checks establishes who is the current OOR. Any subsequent OOR's of that same tool....are burdened with the liability, of course ---- but also the bureaucratic requirement of vetting and registering.
Duh!
------------------------------------------------

You still weren’t clear on who’s responsible?

The guy holding the gun, right? What is it you’re after beyond that?

 

[Chillicothe]

You still weren’t clear on who’s responsible?

"Responsibility'.......is shared.
"Liability".....is shared.

The trigger-puller bears primary responsibility. He is the killer. The trigger puller.
The careless? or negligent? or mendacious? Owner of Record bears a share of the liability, the blame.
And needs be punished for that according to society's laws.
That should be clear.

 

[jc456]

The careless? or negligent? or mendacious? Owner of Record bears a share of the liability, the blame

Since when?

So ford dealer that sold Darrell Brooks mom the car is culpable as well?

 

[Blues Man]

Not 100%
That is not correct

Irrelevant but driving is in fact restricted. Driving too fast, wrong way, reckless, and, to address your point about alcohol, drunk driving are all illegal and all restrict your driving.

You see
You have incorporated this gun crap into your belief system to the point where your ideology has become your theology.

As with all religious cults, there is no room to talk.
So they must be eliminated.

Driving and gun ownership have no commonalities at all.

Driving on public roads is not a right but a privilege granted by the states and that privilege can be revoked at anytime for any reason

I have no theology. You do the same stupid shit every gun control freak does. I'm waiting for the juvenile penis references next for I am sure you'll be making penis, fetish and masturbatory references very soon.

A gun a nothing but a tool and it happens to be the single best tool for self defense.

 

[Blues Man]

It's an arm
Why aren't you people protesting this?

Because it's a stupid argument. There are very few legitimate civilian uses for explosives.

Are you going to bring up nuclear bombs too?

 

[Blues Man]

The Bush years were tough on me. But I've been saving since that age too. Still I am going to need my social security.

So you will be able to live off the interest or do you have to tap into your savings? I can retire without social security too but then I would have to tap into my million. If I can pay my bills with social security then I don't have to.

And that's great for you. But most people don't make nearly what I make or have what I have and all those people are why you can't **** with social security.

Republicans will make cuts to social security. Didn't say they did already. If not, why have they told us not to count on it being there? Are they just fear mongering? They don't say "....because Democrats are going to end the program". If they believed that, you can bet they'd be saying it.

So either they have been fear mongering or they have been honest for the last 40 years. Eventually they're going to make cuts.

And raise retirement age. They already justify doing it by telling us we are living longer.

You sir are a liar or fool.

I have not touched any of my principal. A million dollars getting a 5% return provides you with a 50K a year income. I have no debt and am not a spendthrift and I my wife and I can live on less than 50K a year so a million dollars in may case would last forever and would in fact grow over the course of my retirement.

If people were allowed to put what the government takes for Ss into a Roth IRA then they would be far far better off.

 

[Blues Man]

'said person'.... is liable. Duh!.
My poor avatar was clear on that. At least, to most readers.
The OOR---Owner-of-Record ----shares the liability with others for the dead 17yr old behind the Waffle House counter.

I will continue to try to be clearer for some here.
The primary actor here....is the trigger-puller.
One of the subsidiary, accessory, or contributing actors is the OOR.
It was, after all, his gun that was used.
He doesn't get off Scott-free.
He owns a portion of the harm.
Duh!
---------------------------------------------


Which brings us right back to "strict liability".
ALL owners-of-record will be incentivized to get that 'strict liability' burden off of their account.
It's a gun....and it will now come burdened with an immense amount of responsibility and liability. On the record.
Legally transfer it to another.....and the liability is gone.
But, it must always rest upon whoever is the OOR.


Well, actually....it is 'society's' business. A high lethality/easily concealed and portable tool is society's business due to the potential harm it can...and has proven to cause.
Thus, strict registration of the OOR, and any subsequent OOR's of that tool......will help society fix part of the liability when the use of that tool causes harm.
-------------------------------------------------

Ummm, the OOR is the purchaser of the gun. Ipso facto. By definition.
Strict registration and background checks establishes who is the current OOR. Any subsequent OOR's of that same tool....are burdened with the liability, of course ---- but also the bureaucratic requirement of vetting and registering.
Duh!
------------------------------------------------

No it isn't "society's" business. It is my right to own a gun.

Using your logic I could argue that it is "society's" business to know how much alcohol you have in your home because you could get drunk and drive a 4000 lb car at a high rate of speed and kill people.

 

[sealybobo]

The only one that determines when you retire is you. Of course it take some preparation and planning. I retired at 60 and could have done it earlier had I chose to do so.

.

Well keep in mind we all went through different experiences. The Bush 2000's were tough on me. All I did that decade was pay my mortgage. But I'm catching up now. The last 8 years have been good to me. I can tell you Bush Bush and Trump were not good for manufacturing. Example, Trump's trade war with china, that he lost. Maybe you're in oil, defense or a cop?

I could have got a job at ford when I was 17. I had a late birthday. But at 17 I could have worked at ford 30 years and at age 47 retired, with a fat pension. Instead I went to college and now I have to work till I'm 62.

When I say have to, I mean I don't want to touch my principle. Just live off the interest, social security. I have a few different investments that will all pay me a nice sum every month for the rest of my life. But make no mistake about it, I want and need my social security. If you Republicans **** with it, it's worse than raising taxes on rich people. Or making companies pay their fair share of taxes. The masses. You repugs are going to rob the masses of what's coming to us. And then blame Democrats. **** that.

 

[sealybobo]

I have not touched any of my principal. A million dollars getting a 5% return provides you with a 50K a year income. I have no debt and am not a spendthrift and I my wife and I can live on less than 50K a year so a million dollars in may case would last forever and would in fact grow over the course of my retirement.

If people were allowed to put what the government takes for Ss into a Roth IRA then they would be far far better off.

That's probably where I will end up. $1 million or $1.4 million. But 5% aint shit. I don't want to live on a budget. I don't want to live my golden years on a $50K budget.

But throw in social security, suddenly I'm not being so frugal.

AND, it pisses me off I have to wait till 65 to get medicare. So you pay for healthcare? That cuts into your $50K

Yes if people HAD TO put that same $ they put into ss into a roth, they'd do better. We should divert the money we all pay into a roth and start making 5% on the money in the fund. Or has the Ukraine War put those stocks in the shitter so right now it's not doing so well. Is the roth safe as ss? Lots of questions. And how are you going to pay off people like me who stay with social security? 20% cuts?

I would almost take 20% cut to my ss if they would let me get medicare at 62 or ****, how about 59 1/2?

You can start withdrawing money from your 401(k) without paying the penalty at 59 ½. This is the age that the IRS has designated as the “age of retirement.” However, you will be penalized if you withdraw money from your 401(k) before this age. The penalty for early withdrawal is ten percent of the amount withdrawn.

So just let me get medicare at 59 1/2 and I'll take the 20% cut. Looks like I'm going to get $2600 at age 62. I'll take it. That's $2000 a month. AND if they said i would never get an increase, I'd still be okay with that. Just give me my $2000 a month. Any more, cool.

Yesterday my dad and I were talking about the max and min of ss.

For example, if you retire at full retirement age in 2023, your maximum benefit would be $3,627. However, if you retire at age 62 in 2023, your maximum benefit would be $2,572. If you retire at age 70 in 2023, your maximum benefit would be $4,555.

1 years of coverage receives a special minimum Social Security benefit of $45.50 per month, while a worker with 30 years of coverage gets a special minimum benefit of $950.80 per month.

So someone who worked only 11 years might only get $50 a month.