|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Fucking Guns
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of required insurance being part of the gun control mechanism. To reach the modicum of reasonable moderation as use of a motor vehicle.
Licensing and registration are gimme's; required for even buying a weapon seems sensible enough for civilized humans. But the scalable cost of insuring a weapon against potential harm it can cause seems fitting. A bolt-action .22? Peanuts to insure. An assault weapon? Prepare the forklift to hoist the money to insure it. Caught owning an uninsured weapon? Confiscated weapon and proportional fine.
Insurance policies to pay all the healthcare and property damage related to the discharge of the firearm. If it exceeds the policy, the rest comes OUT OF YOUR FUCKING POCKET.
So, go ahead, defend yourself. It's probably worth it. Maybe even defend your property, if it makes financial sense. Just remember that insurance companies will likely charge you a slight premium (heh) if you have a pre-existing claim.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
#gunsplaining heard today. Nonironically.
Were you reading the Onion again? Again-again, I mean. Except more agains, obviously.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
la vie en rouge
Parisienne
# 10688
|
Posted
Here’s the bit I don’t get: people are apparently buying up bump stocks in case they get banned. However, if they do get banned, owning them is going to be illegal as well as buying and selling them. You would have to get caught, I suppose, but still – people are very stupid.
--------------------
Rent my holiday home in the South of France
Posts: 3696 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
@Rook. Insurance. That is so rational, so perfect a solution in an imperfect world, that it can't possibly happen.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
I like the idea of the insurance companies against the NRA. They're the two groups doing the most to hurt America, one getting us shot and the other keeping us from having national health care to pay for the doctor bills.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Here’s the bit I don’t get: people are apparently buying up bump stocks in case they get banned. However, if they do get banned, owning them is going to be illegal as well as buying and selling them. You would have to get caught, I suppose, but still – people are very stupid.
No, they understand the political situation. Any new gun legislation will have a grandfather clause exempting current owners, and private sales and gun shows will continue unchecked.
To give you an idea of how ridiculously powerful the gun lobby is: New Arizona Law: Guns From Buybacks Can't Be Destroyedl.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Here’s the bit I don’t get: people are apparently buying up bump stocks in case they get banned. However, if they do get banned, owning them is going to be illegal as well as buying and selling them. You would have to get caught, I suppose, but still – people are very stupid.
Depends if the ban is on the device itself, or just on new ones. For example, the 1986 ban on machine guns was on new ones. It is still legal to buy and own a machine gun that was made pre-1986.
So perhaps they are hoping that the language in a bump stock ban would be the same, and that their existing devices would be grandfathered in.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
@Rook. Insurance. That is so rational, so perfect a solution in an imperfect world, that it can't possibly happen.
Gun manufacturers in the USA are already protected against product liability lawsuits. After all, if a gun is used to injure or kill someone, it is working exactly as it has been designed to. And while drivers are licensed and cars are registered, this will never happen on a national scale, because of course, the tyrannical gummint would use that information to confiscate those brave patriots' guns.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
quote:
No, they understand the political situation. Any new gun legislation will have a grandfather clause exempting current owners, and private sales and gun shows will continue unchecked.
![[Eek!]](eek.gif) Good grief. What's the point of calling it a ban, then? In the rest of the world when a type of gun is banned, owning one then becomes illegal.
And if you hand a weapon in to the police, it is understood that you have relinquished all ownership rights and the police can do what they like with it (usually it's destroyed).
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
jbohn
Shipmate
# 8753
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Depends if the ban is on the device itself, or just on new ones. For example, the 1986 ban on machine guns was on new ones. It is still legal to buy and own a machine gun that was made pre-1986.
So perhaps they are hoping that the language in a bump stock ban would be the same, and that their existing devices would be grandfathered in.
And that the going price will skyrocket, just as it did for pre-1986 automatic weapons...
--------------------
We are punished by our sins, not for them.
--Elbert Hubbard
Posts: 989 | From: East of Eden, west of St. Paul | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jbohn:
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Depends if the ban is on the device itself, or just on new ones. For example, the 1986 ban on machine guns was on new ones. It is still legal to buy and own a machine gun that was made pre-1986.
So perhaps they are hoping that the language in a bump stock ban would be the same, and that their existing devices would be grandfathered in.
And that the going price will skyrocket, just as it did for pre-1986 automatic weapons...
People will make them. Converting a semi-automatic to full isn't rocket surgery, but does take a moderate amount of skill. Making a bumpstock barely requires any.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
People will make them. Converting a semi-automatic to full isn't rocket surgery, but does take a moderate amount of skill. Making a bumpstock barely requires any.
Yep. A former neighbor of mine (30+ years ago) was arrested for having two homemade machine guns in his possession.
sabine
[ 06. October 2017, 16:06: Message edited by: sabine ]
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
Legitimately owning guns, tinkering with guns, increasing their efficiency, all whilst a little worm wriggles in the head.
It was said that Hamilton stroked his revolvers lovingly. On one occasion he asked a retired policeman friend how long it normally takes for police to arrive at an armed incident, the worm was getting closer to the surface.
Big difference between that creature and this latest creature is the lack of any clear grievance. This new feature of the random gun massacre is liable to really screw people’s minds.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
I think so too.
‘No clear motive’ means almost anybody could do this. Add that to ‘almost anybody can own a gun’ and it must be hard, even for gun nuts, to process.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
It's not a new feature at all. The technology is.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ohher
Shipmate
# 18607
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I think so too.
‘No clear motive’ means almost anybody could do this. Add that to ‘almost anybody can own a gun’ and it must be hard, even for gun nuts, to process.
The search for a "clear motive" springs from the criminal justice arena, where in any murder the murderer (if and when s/he comes to trial) must be shown to have the means to commit the crime, the opportunity to commit the crime, and some rationale for committing the crime, i.e., the motive. It's SOP in criminal justice to look for a motive, even though (as in most mass murders - Dylann Roof is an exception) there will never be a trial.
For non-police, the search for motive is an effort to "make sense" of the crime, for our own peace of mind. In the case of "ordinary" homicide, it's usually a relationship gone bad. Victim and perpetrator are/were nearly always connected to each other, and somehow love, kindness, forbearance, turned to hate and rage. The rejected lover kills the partner; the fired employee shoots the boss; the thwarted child kills the parent; the frustrated neighbor does in the householder whose fence or fruit tree impinges on a property line.
There's terrorism, too, of course -- where "the motive" may be understood as "service to a cause," however extreme or irrational (or futile).
More than a passing glance at such motives reveals them to be empty rationalizations. There's always a non-fatal way to handle such relationship breakdowns, yet those resorting to fatal violence seldom seem to have attempted, or perhaps even to have considered, these.
Clearly, then, there's more at work here -- in the US, ready availability of guns, a culture-wide commitment to quick, simple answers, a culture-wide belief in "might makes right," and no doubt more. In this culture, we also seem to have arrived at the fantastical conclusion that we're somehow entitled to existences free of pain and trouble; the first hint of same sends us into frustration and rage, and too many of us seem unable to manage these.
Searches for motives here are futile and misguided, even when we think we "see" one. What we're really up to, I'm afraid, is "otherizing" perpetrators, and so demonstrating to ourselves "this is not, and could never be, me."
We'd make a lot more progress in reducing these crimes by reducing the sheer volume of readily-available guns, of course. We'd also make progress if we started by understanding how any perpetrator could easily be any one of us (given the "right" circumstances, and given how near those circs are to any of us at any given moment), and why that's so, and recognizing that it's up to each of us to guide our culture into different channels -- a goal not accomplishable through violence.
--------------------
From the Land of the Native American Brave and the Home of the Buy-One-Get-One-Free
Posts: 374 | From: New Hampshire, USA | Registered: Jun 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
It's not a new feature at all. The technology is.
Grievance of some nature has been the common factor in the very small number incidents of this kind in UK. It could be that this has long since ceased to be the case in the US.
So this freak apparently did it as the last tick on his bucket list?
If that ends up as the only rational explanation I still said folk will have difficulty getting their heads around that.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ohher:
The search for a "clear motive" springs from the criminal justice arena, where in any murder the murderer (if and when s/he comes to trial) must be shown to have the means to commit the crime, the opportunity to commit the crime, and some rationale for committing the crime, i.e., the motive. It's SOP in criminal justice to look for a motive, even though (as in most mass murders - Dylann Roof is an exception) there will never be a trial.
Motive is not a required part of a prosecution. Nor is it required in the investigative process, but it often is used as a factor in determining and evaluating suspects. Many, if not most, crimes are solved with circumstantial evidence¹ rather than direct evidence.²
The evidence in the Mandalay shooting is circumstantial, BTW.
The FBI searching for motive, in this case, is less to determine who as it is to determining why. But it is fairly stupid here. The problem is not why, but how. And this will not be fixed nor begin to be fixed.
¹Circumstantial: Evidence in which inference is necessary to connect accused to crime. Fingerprints, DNA, ownership/possession of weapon, etc.
²Direct: Eyewitness observationᵃ of the accused actually committing the crime. Photographic, auditory and/or video of same.
ᵃWhich is bugger all for accuracy, but is given overwhelming credulity.
Here is a question; Not to all Americans, but to the massive overlap in a Venn diagram:
If America is the greatest country in the world, why the fuck do you need guns to protect yourselves from it?
[ 07. October 2017, 15:42: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Ohher
Shipmate
# 18607
|
Posted
But how can there be a "rational" explanation for so irrational an act? Why expect or want or desire people to get their heads around this? What we need to do is REJECT it.
The very act of "processing" such acts "rationally" is Step One to acceptance of the unacceptable. It's the beginning of the normalization process which leads precisely to where it has always led: to where we are right now. We groan, we "otherize," we tweet, we claim there's nothing to be done, lather, rinse, repeat until the next mass murder.
There ARE things to be done, but these don't include understanding WHY this particular individual took dozens of lethal weapons to a hotel room to shoot-to-kill into a randomly-selected crowd of fellow humans. Trying to wrap people's heads around THAT is a waste of human time and energy and likely even counterproductive.
What we DO need to focus on is listing the NRA as the terrorist organization it clearly is, banning private possession of assault weapons, closing gun sale loopholes, expanding background checks, legally clarifying the Second Amendment so it doesn't end up meaning "any damn fool can own damn weaponry she or he is able to get hands on, to deploy at whim whenever he or she feels a hangnail coming on."
We also need to recognize and change our cultural addiction to violence -- in sports, in entertainment (so-called), in child-rearing -- maybe even in language. Do you notice that Americans who fall ill are nearly always described as "fighting a battle" with their diseases? That US politicians are forever running for office to "fight" for us?
Opioids be damned. Our worst addiction is to the drug of violence.
--------------------
From the Land of the Native American Brave and the Home of the Buy-One-Get-One-Free
Posts: 374 | From: New Hampshire, USA | Registered: Jun 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ohher:
... We'd also make progress if we started by understanding how any perpetrator could easily be any one of us (given the "right" circumstances, and given how near those circs are to any of us at any given moment), and why that's so, and recognizing that it's up to each of us to guide our culture into different channels -- a goal not accomplishable through violence.
Yes, bravo, absolutely. IMO, the culture needs a huge shot of "there but for the grace of God go I". Might also help with a lot of other issues, like cheering about people dying without health insurance. Instead of "I'm a rugged individualist until I need someone to blame."
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Seriously, WTF?! Why is anyone surprised about that church raffle? Disgusted, yes, but surprised?
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Sane people are not surprised at the insanity of others.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Disagree. Being surprised at outrageous insane behaviour is the only sane response. Because the alternative contains an acceptance.
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Disagree. Being surprised at outrageous insane behaviour is the only sane response. Because the alternative contains an acceptance.
And I respectfully disagree with you. I'm no longer surprised by anything the snollygoster-in-chief does. Throw rolls of paper towels at people who've lost everything and are living in a flood? No longer surprising. The s-in-c could dance naked on the White House lawn, and I'd look away and go ![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif) -- but surprise? Nope.
But that certainly doesn't mean I accept his horrendous actions.
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
“All proceeds go toward the program to reach the hurting and broken of society,”
They just can’t see the connection between the sale of weapons designed to kill and the hurting and broken people in Las Vegas.
No connection. They have become inured to any connection between guns and broken lives. How much further will this have to go before they wake up?
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
I am tempted to start a Hell topic about Christians doing spectacularly horrible witness, actions that guarantee unbelievers instantly consider Buddhism more seriously. This would of course be one of the star examples. Here's another.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Sane people are not surprised at the insanity of others.
I thought degree of surprise was one measure of the observed insanity. As in, "Dafuq?"
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Prester John
Shipmate
# 5502
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
I am tempted to start a Hell topic about Christians doing spectacularly horrible witness, actions that guarantee unbelievers instantly consider Buddhism more seriously. This would of course be one of the star examples. Here's another.
Buddhism? The Rohingya would like to have a word with you.
Posts: 884 | From: SF Bay Area | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Prester John:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
I am tempted to start a Hell topic about Christians doing spectacularly horrible witness, actions that guarantee unbelievers instantly consider Buddhism more seriously. This would of course be one of the star examples. Here's another.
Buddhism? The Rohingya would like to have a word with you.
Any religion is susceptible to abuse.
There is less within the teachings of Buddhism to justify violence, but humans will fuck up any philosophy.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Prester John
Shipmate
# 5502
|
Posted
I'm seriously curious as to how you can quantify that in any meaningful, measurable way that would even look at least somewhat objective.
Posts: 884 | From: SF Bay Area | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Prester John:
I'm seriously curious as to how you can quantify that in any meaningful, measurable way that would even look at least somewhat objective.
Read the sutras and read the OT. And then you tell me I am wrong.
ETA:Before anyone else gets their knickers twisted too far up their arses, I am not saying anything about one being better or worse than the other or making people better or worse.
[ 12. October 2017, 17:26: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Prester John:
I'm seriously curious as to how you can quantify that in any meaningful, measurable way that would even look at least somewhat objective.
You are incredibly stupid. I suspect that it is by choice.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Prester John
Shipmate
# 5502
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
quote:
Originally posted by Prester John:
I'm seriously curious as to how you can quantify that in any meaningful, measurable way that would even look at least somewhat objective.
You are incredibly stupid. I suspect that it is by choice.
How succinct.
Posts: 884 | From: SF Bay Area | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
It's a gift.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
Has anyone asked Sarah Huckerbee-Sanders whether its OK to talk about gun control yet?
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Still too soon.
Every DAY. This happens every day* in America.
*On average. Some days, no one kills more than 1 or 2 people.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
Yes, it does. Here in Arizona, there are three things that one can bet money on seeing every day on the TV news: (1) someone got shot; (2) someone's house burned down; and (3) someone drove the wrong way on the freeway.
The frightening thing is that everybody seems to accept it as normal.
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
Yes, it does. Here in Arizona, there are three things that one can bet money on seeing every day on the TV news: (1) someone got shot; (2) someone's house burned down; and (3) someone drove the wrong way on the freeway.
The frightening thing is that everybody seems to accept it as normal.
Only one of these is directly attributable to Constitutional rights.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
You have the choice of:
1. The Constitutional right to commit mass murder
2. The Constitutional right not to install a smoke detector
3. The Constitutional right to drive any way you like
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
If you have a child, no smoke detector in a home could be a child protection matter? I believe it is here.
Might there be insurance implications? Thinking that nonsmokers get better life insurance rates, and home owners without solid fuel (wood, pellet) burning appliances get better house insurance rates, might homes without guns in them get better rates on the personal liability part of the policies?
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
It wouldn't surprise me if the NRA managed to sneak in legislation or regulation to prevent insurance companies from considering guns when assessing risk ... after all, they campaigned successfully to stop doctors from asking their suicidal patients if they have guns in the house.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
It wouldn't surprise me if the NRA managed to sneak in legislation or regulation to prevent insurance companies from considering guns when assessing risk ... after all, they campaigned successfully to stop doctors from asking their suicidal patients if they have guns in the house.
I looked it up. It sort of says that doctors may ask if the question is relevant. It is filed on the 'net as "docs vs glocks". The doc can ask about anything else, but not that. Which is beyond stupid.
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
![[Waterworks]](graemlins/bawling.gif)
![[Help]](graemlins/help.gif)
