Having a weekly deduction for income taxes was one of the smartest things the Feds did. If we had to pay our taxes in full come April, people would lose their minds.
The fact that it comes out before we see it means it isn’t even there and is why they are able to take 25% of what we earn at a minimum.
February 11, 2014 at 1:22pm
I agree that children need to learn life lessons about losing with grace and character. However, there is nothing wrong with making sure that everyone gets a valentines card. These are 5 and six year olds for crying out loud. Heck, the unit they are working on is about animals.
More than likely, these kids wouldn’t be able to fathom not giving a card to everyone in the first place. Adults need to grow up.
January 16, 2014 at 9:37am
So, why are you asking the governments permission to conduct a non-criminal activity with your child?
They’re your kids, right? I understand what you are trying to do, but you are allowing the Gov’t to have too much say into what you do with your children.
January 16, 2014 at 9:10am
Theres actually a little something called “the presumption of innocence.”
IF these idiots are convicted, throw the book at them. Criminals need to be made to feel the consequences for their crime.
However, they also deserve their due process.
January 16, 2014 at 8:58am
Actually, KMAN, I’ve already been to Afghanistan. However, I much prefer to feed my family the animals I harvest back here rather than to feed my family’s harvest to the animals over there.
January 14, 2014 at 5:49pm
So, by using your age and maturity based argument, are you implying that CPL holders are more mature and capable of carrying a pistol?
Who are you to say what I can and cannot do? That’s the same thing the collectivists are attempting.
I’ll tell you what else is called common sense, not detaining an individual who is commiting no crime.
January 14, 2014 at 5:45pm
There were actually two possible correct actions: First, he could have driven on by and determined that the man did not appear to be committing or about to commit a crime. Second, if the officer HAD to do something, the officer could have spoken to the man with professional courtesy in order to determine for himself that the individual was not committing nor was he about to committ a crime.
Would it be legal in your mind for the officer to have done this to a random person walking down the street? By law it’s the exact same thing.
January 14, 2014 at 5:39pm
It’s actually getting better around here. I OC frequently, and I’ve never once had a negative interaction with the police.
January 14, 2014 at 5:37pm
Well, considering that I carry at all times and open carry frequently, I wouldn’t have an issue with it. To be honest, I’d probably feel safer knowing that my children were that much better protected.
What may or may not make you uncomfortable is not my concern.
January 14, 2014 at 5:31pm
Yes, he actually was supposed to take the chance the guy walking down the street isn’t nuts. It’s called Liberty or Freedom if you prefer.
The fact of the matter is that there is technically no difference in this mans activities than if he was walking down the street not OCing.
Nothing the cop did was “reasonable.” There was no threat to the officers life, nor any reason to aim his weapon at this man.
Personally, I’m glad that this is now a fight as it has to happen somewhere and sometime. Or do you expect for the collectivists to suddenly surrender?
January 9, 2014 at 1:37pm
Well Sapper, your argument is extremelly flawed. The rights of an individual stop at violating the rights of others.
I’m fairly certain that human sacrifice and honor killings violate the rights of the victims.
That being said, I agree that the law is particularly silly and subjective.
January 9, 2014 at 1:34pm
Shame that you have to put negativity into what is an otherwise positive article.
As an aside, we haven’t had Free Market Capitalism since 1913.
January 9, 2014 at 1:22pm
I don’t have any skin in the game on this one. Would I be particularly appreciative of someone filming my kids going to school, absolutely not. However, you go wrong when you say that the parents have a right to forbid anything. Paranoia does not become you.
Your rights stop where mine begins.
January 9, 2014 at 1:17pm
Great, you’re alarmed by this. Glad that you know everything about an individuals motives based on an news article and I’m certainly tickled to death that you have the answer to redress this guys grievances.
However, it seems to me you are adding to the paranoia about the bad man “gonna gitcha!”
I would propose that people take the steps needed to be aware of their surroundings in order protect themselves and their family and worry less about the amorphic threats posed by everything and everyone. You are using the same rationale that justifies the NSA snooping everywhere.
January 9, 2014 at 1:10pm
That’s a great idea. Lets violate specific privacy restrictions because it’s a convenient way to get what we want. In the name of safety, right? You have a bright future in our government.
February 27, 2013 at 3:15pm
I just don’t know. If someone breaks into my home or is a threat to myself or someone else (in the legal sense, of course) within my home then they are going to die. Period.
All of the run-up spoken about in this article is really just hubris. It is all implied and is the course of action for most reasonable people when they are out and about. Breaking into my house, however, first step in escalation of force is I am shooting. The dog is only there to warn you.
February 27, 2013 at 12:08pm
On the other hand, the parents should have contacted the school and school district to get this settled before yelling “fire.”
Problems with public schools notwithstanding, this Superintendent at least sounds pretty reasonable.
February 25, 2013 at 9:44am
No, they are saying air strikes.
You don’t typically get on a radio and call in a UAV. You get on a radio and get airplanes or helicopters.
February 22, 2013 at 12:54pm
Yes, women are stuck on the front lines already. Considering there are no front lines in this assymetrical imperialism we are pouring money and lives into.
Yes, women are out there doing “stuff.” However, most of the time they are less capable than their male counterparts when it came to physical demands. Show me an instance where this will make our military more capable at killing people and breaking their stuff? I’ve seen women react when bullets are coming and going, they sucked. There is a big difference between a well trained combat Soldier/Marine and a REMF being forced to pull the trigger because their convoy was attacked. They are both heroes to mom and dad back home but for those who know the difference, it’s a mile wide.
February 21, 2013 at 2:42pm
Uhm…they do have laws for all of that. You can’t commit murder with guns, knives, or any weapon.
Also, it doesn’t matter whether you are drunk enough to drive all over the road or not. If your BAC is over the limit then it is over the limit. Don’t do the things you know you aren’t supposed to do. Also, please ensure you think for yourself every now and then.