Tpoppa

Here is the problem with your simplistic understanding of the world around you... On paper, I think that the government does have the peoples best interest in mind. In practice, however, the bloated, argumentitive bureacracy that is going to wait till the very last minute (if we're lucky) to resolve this fiscal cliff bullshit isn't always capable of making great decisions or effectively enforcing policy. You are making the arguement that giving up the right to bear arms will make us safer. From the perspective of the FBI, CIA, and other super-secret government agencies that are protecting us...we could be safer if we gave up rights regarding: Illegal search and seizure Trial by jury Cruel and unusual punishments Rather than typing, here is a link to the rest http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/billofrights The Bill of Rights wasn't random. It is a well thought out document written by very smart people who previously lived under a government that supposedly had their best interest in mind. Every ammendment wasn't written to address paranoid theories, they were written to prevent ACTUAL government infringement on rights of it's citizens.

Are you suggesting a well armed militia that is not under the controll of the goverment? Before you answer, go ahead and ask your robot-killer-navy-cousin.

Magz, perhaps you should read the responses...slowly.

Do you have any clue why the 2nd ammendment exists? Seriously? Here's a hint...it's not for deer hunters. The founders of the US of A were generally fearful of government and government controlled military. And they had good reason...

Seriously flawed logic right there. You're making the point that the exact opposite of your opinion is the only alternative. Politicians routinely try that crap. That kind of logic is an obstacle to clear, rational thinking.

Magz knows...becuase he has a cousin in the Navy or something. So he's a know-it-all about all things military.

Interesting read.

Fuck From wht I've read this kid was quiet, reasonably well behaved, no previous criminal record, good grades, and described as skinny goth kid. There have been several references of a likely personality disorder, but I haven't seen a specific disorder mentioned Why attack little kids? This makes no fucking sense.

Right, Christmas parties...

I don't mean murders overall, I specifically mean young troubled males massacring innocents. You can find examples from longer ago, but this type of crime is definitely on the rise. Yesterday, I watched a really intersting inverview of an FBI profiler who specializes in this thing (damn, I wish there was a video online). According to the profiler, this type of crime is almost always committed by a male age 16-24. The common thread was manic tendencies, bi-polar tendencies, and a history of being either sexually or physically abused when very young. He said there was also a connection the young males life not going according to plan like a divorce or failing out of school resulting in a feeling that revenge on society is justified. It's was a very specific kind of crazy, but a very difficult to catch ahead of time.

Guns have been around for a long time. This phonemena of young troubled males massacring innocents seems to be more prevelant during the last 15 years or so. There are many societal factors that contribute: declining family values, lack of role models, multiple generations of parents that are afraid to properly discipline their children. As a result there is a growing number of young people that are suffering from mental illness that do not know how to channel depression, frustration, anger, etc.

The Associated Press is reporting the Connecticut elementary school shooting suspect has been identified as Adam Lanza, 20. Initial reports indicated the shooter was 24-year-old Ryan Lanza, however the Associated Press confirmed Friday afternoon the shooter is Adam Lanza, Ryan Lanza’s brother.

When did mankind reach this level of crazy-evil? There is nothing more despicable or spineless than making kids the target of your insanity.

This

Awesome if that works for you I personally don't have the guts for that type of investing. Any stock that's volitile enough to gain 50% in a few weeks can also lose in a few weeks. You have to know when to get in and when to get out.

I have some $$ spread across Morningstar 4 or 5 star rated funds in categories that I believe have (relative) stability and potential for growth. -Tech -Medical -Pharmaceutical -Utilities -Blue Chips -S&P Index...to name a few. I recheck the Morningstar ratings once a year and move funds if necessary. Fidelity has a good user interface for managing your money and researching funds. You can setup either a Roth IRA or a normal investment account depending on your intentions.

My first bile was a Kawasaki KV75 when I was about 8 years old. I must have crashed that thing about 100 times trying all sorts of bad ideas. The local police escorted me home a few times for riding on public streets. Illegal? Who knew?

Being part of a group ins't anti-American or communist. Your analogy is quite a stretch.

I am not following your meaning. Are you saying that unions 'bring us together?' Unions are nearly as divisive a topic as religion or even oil threads.

Perhaps the most sensible comment that Magz has made on OR

True. Regulation (in many forms) prevents a completely free market.

A free market is a market where the price of a good or service is determined by supply and demand. Unions, by definition, are not compatible with supply and demand. In any Economics 101 class they will tell you the common exceptions in the US to a free market are...1. Minimum Wage (not necessarily a bad thing), 2. Rent Control, and 3. Union Labor. Pretty simple really.

More in the vein of eliminating competition and redistribution of wealth http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/7/labor-unions-and-communism/ Unions today loathe freedom, as Andy Stern demonstrates in his Wall Street Journal column, because unions require unfree markets in order to thrive. They love big government because unions require the government to guarantee their monopolies on labor. And it is precisely those features of unions that have contributed to their increasing unpopularity in the United States, where citizens are becoming wise to the corrupt conspiracy between unions and government to extinguish their liberties.

I have said before that I think unions have done some good, however I think that good was over a while ago. With OSHA, child labor laws, local media, social media, etc workplace abuse that occured 100 years ago just doesn't happen on nearly the same scale as it once did. Unions may deserve some, but certainly not all of that credit for improving working conditions. In the last 20 years, unions have done a really good job of chasing jobs to other states and even other countries. I think labor unions are needed in places like China that are in the midst of thier Industrial Revolution. Here in the US, their time has come and gone. Isn't a labor union basically a Communist organization anyway