Disclaimer

Sticks and stones...

That video made jalopnik a few days ago... which I assume was crossposted from hellforleathermagazine.com http://jalopnik.com/5930273/this-motorcyclist-t+boned-a-deer-and-just-kept-on-riding

Fulltext here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr1627/text/eas Section 601 is where you want to go... Only applies to funerals of military service members (present, past), establishes a time limit before and after the funeral and a geographic perimeter, damages of up to $50k and one year in jail if violated. This still won't stop douchenozzles from acting like douchenozzles, and I think there may be legal challenges to this though they may be hard to surmount given the specificity of this legislation.

Yes, your vehicle insurance will cut a check to whatever value you're insured to -- that is correct. Caveat being the insurance only cuts the check if the accident is your fault, or if the other driver is underinsured, but otherwise the 'at fault' party (read: the other person) pays in Ohio via the Liability coverage -- not in all states, but in Ohio. So, med. coverage is basically covering you if it's YOUR fault (and if you review your policy, it's typically a very low amount -- 4 digits maybe? -- that won't even put a dent in a bill for an extended stay at a hospital; therefore, pointless.) I guess I see it as, if it's my fault anyway, my personal health care will pick up the bill less any deductibles I have vs. giving the automobile insurer extra money for something they really don't have any business in and dictate the terms to -- they are not health insurers. Right from the Progressive website I've highlighted the important part in red. I'm already covered for ALL medical and funeral via my Health and Life Insurance plans, why double/triple cover myself on an auto policy too that only pays if my medical bills are incurred in an auto-related accident?

Look, let's get one thing straight before this goes any further. I'm the only intellectual superior here. The only people that *may* be moar superior-er would be the ones that didn't even bother opening this thread.

If you go to the hospital on a trackday, that's what you have personal health insurance for :confused: Medical payments coverage from your auto/bike policy is an even bigger scam than the policies themselves if you're like most people with personal health insurance. If you don't have health insurance, you probably shouldn't be doing trackdays or riding a motorcycle on the street in the first place.

It's mostly pictures of YOU

Think about this for a minute, hypothetically... lets say you can get collision AND trackday coverage for an extra $500/yr with a $1000 deductible. vs. Nothing. Unless your last name is Rossi, DiSalvo, Hayden, or Stoner, you'll likely keep it upright and have fun at the track. So, the cashflows breakdown as follows if you GET insurance. Y1: -$500 vs. $0 Y2: -$500 vs. $0 Y3: -$500 vs. $0 Now, let's say you lowside at the top of the keyhole at MidO in Y4. Plastics and new controls run you $2500 from the OE. Y4: -$1500 + $2500 vs. $-2500 but all added up, you've already "donated" $1500 to the insurance the prior years, so all in all, you're still $-500 in the hole with insurance using that hypothetical situation. Not to mention if you claim it on your insurance, a $2500 accident may likely 'total' a 2003 Kawi, so you won't have a clean title anymore which makes resale value plummet. And now YOU have a claim on your insurance record which may or may not affect your rates. Point being, you should probably do some calculations based on the adjusted new premium and deductible they're quoting you to see if it's really worth it. Insurance may be worth it if you wreck your bike soon after you get it, but not so much later.

Glenn Beck allegedly raped and murdered a girl back in 1990. #randominterjection #asyouwere

Or, if you wreck at the track, pay for the damages yourself and just chalk it up to the cost of playing with your big boy toys? Seems pretty simple.

You guys disappoint... took 25 whole posts before the leghumper smiley came out. OR just ain't the same at welcoming female fresh meat anymore. Just remember, it's Prison Rules here

How can one be 'overly skeptical'?

^^^^----- And there's the sticky wicket. If it's good enough for the goose, it's good enough for the gander. So, if Obama conspiracists are called Birthers, are Romney conspiracists called Taxers?

#8 is the funny one, only because many of the Republican governors' rhetoric about "I don't like it so I'm not doing it" are going to lose their own states' right to setup and run their own to the federal gov't. States rights lost because GOP governors want to pick up their ball and go home.

Church related... since this thread is kinda sorta church related. I didn't snopes or verify the first image is legit (via Reddit), but if you assume it is... food for thought.

I'd have no problems releasing my college transcripts...

Will it house dressage horses?

Fair enough -- no one is marching to Capitol Hill. But, I still find it amusing that people get worked up enough to start the immediate political bashing over something this trivial - introducing a bill that would be reviewed.

I wasn't talking about *you* specifically since it wasn't really a counterargument - I get it. But in the general sense, if you're having a debate about the pro/cons to something and the person you're debating with resorts to 'what if's' and hypotheticals -- they're basically conceding that their argument has no boundaries, which isn't an effective technique in debate because the other side can then resort to the same thing. I'm not "blinded by my beliefs" -- I just don't understand why the first thing people do when they read something they don't agree with is they grab their pitchforks :villagers: and raise a fuss about it, as opposed to thinking it through rationally, doing the appropriate research, and utilizing some critical thinking skills. If people get that worked up over a single headline, then in my humble opinion, they're easily swayed one way or another based on their beliefs, which is common in psychology (cognitive bias). Something, again in my humble opinion, that people should recognize and try to mitigate in themselves.

When the counterargument starts with "What if" and starts reaching into hypotheticals that have zero to slim chance of happening... it's not a very strong counter argument. Hence, not worth even concerning yourself with (*though, I'll admit is it fun to read people getting worked up over nothing, makes it easy to identify who can be easily mentally manipulated*) Which is why KK is just trolling when he posts stuff like this.

You do realize that with our current gov't, there are a vast number of bills that are introduced to placate, patronize, and pander to the citizens' "issue du jour" -- which is the CO shooting right now -- that really have no honest intention of moving forward and becoming law. Mostly because the citizens' lobby is worthless, money-wise, but politicians can say "Well we tried to do something, but [insert thousands of arguments here]" in order to grab the votes they need because their constiuents still believe their best interests are at the heart of their political figureheads. Point being.... why get worked up and angry over these bills, especially at the introduction stage, that for all intents are designed to fail? It's as much of a waste of effort to get upset about it as it was to introduce them in the first place....

It's possible it might rain Friday. It's possible that a bear may eat your testicles at 4:33 AM tomorrow. It's possible you may sh*t your pants after drinking laxative. Let's hope it doesn't happen. :villagers: "It's possible to be angry over something, just tell me what to be potentially angry about"

Why's she snooping around your bedroom? That's not awkward that's creepy and smothering.

Oldie but a goodie... and the Pokemon synced vid makes it funny for me. Mindless Self Indulgence - Bitches http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4XGBw3mM1w

Don't live at home, awkwardness averted.