The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-09-2013, 11:16 AM   #176
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
This is all a matter of liability laws as with any other incidence of injury or death. I did no "drive-by." Apparently you want me to post Colorado Revised Statutes on personal liability? Gimme a break. The same laws apply everywhere.
I don't live in Colorado.

If you are found liable, but can't pay for the victim's medical bills, who pays in Colorado? I'm genuinely curious.

Why is this so difficult to answer?
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 11:22 AM   #177
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
I don't live in Colorado.

If you are found liable, but can't pay for the victim's medical bills, who pays in Colorado? I'm genuinely curious.

Why is this so difficult to answer?
I'm not a lawyer and if you wish to have answers on CRS, there are online databases to do so. You seem to be demanding that I do research for you to answer your question, which is clearly a leading question of some sort in relation to your hostility toward gun ownership in some manner or another.

I think the question here is really, why is it so difficult for you to do your own research?
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 11:31 AM   #178
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
I'm not a lawyer and if you wish to have answers on CRS, there are online databases to do so. You seem to be demanding that I do research for you to answer your question, which is clearly a leading question of some sort in relation to your hostility toward gun ownership in some manner or another.

I think the question here is really, why is it so difficult for you to do your own research?
thought so.

The answer is that the money has to come from somewhere. If it is coming from anywhere other than the person found liable, then it's coming from the wrong source. And since we already established that the hypothetically liable person doesn't have the money to pay, it's not coming from them.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 11:56 AM   #179
Requiem
~~~
 
Requiem's Avatar
 
~ ~ ~

Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Earth Division
Posts: 23,292

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Princes of Tara
Default

Well that escalated quickly!
Requiem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 12:05 PM   #180
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Requiem View Post
Well that escalated quickly!
He's frantically searching LexisNexis for an answer.

houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 12:06 PM   #181
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
thought so.

The answer is that the money has to come from somewhere. If it is coming from anywhere other than the person found liable, then it's coming from the wrong source. And since we already established that the hypothetically liable person doesn't have the money to pay, it's not coming from them.
This is relevant to what besides nothing?
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 12:07 PM   #182
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
He's frantically searching LexisNexis for an answer.

Why would I lift a finger for you?
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 12:16 PM   #183
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
This is relevant to what besides nothing?
It's perfectly relevant. If you are liable for death or injury due to an accident with a firearm, but cannot pay, the financial burden is shifted to the victim, the hospital and the taxpayers, none of whom should have any responsibility to pay for YOUR mistake.

That is why gun owners should be required to purchase liability insurance for their firearms.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 12:16 PM   #184
Requiem
~~~
 
Requiem's Avatar
 
~ ~ ~

Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Earth Division
Posts: 23,292

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Princes of Tara
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
He's frantically searching LexisNexis for an answer.

Putting that English degree of her/his to work!
Requiem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 12:33 PM   #185
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
It's perfectly relevant. If you are liable for death or injury due to an accident with a firearm, but cannot pay, the financial burden is shifted to the victim, the hospital and the taxpayers, none of whom should have any responsibility to pay for YOUR mistake.

That is why gun owners should be required to purchase liability insurance for their firearms.
If that's the case then apply it everywhere: Alcohol purchases, pets, children, knife ownership, gas stoves, electricity.

This is more anti-gun hypocrisy, which is what I smelled to begin with with your line of questioning.

Odd how asking someone to spend $5 on a state ID to verify their identity before voting is a disenfranchisement of constitutional rights but forcing gun insurance isn't.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 12:37 PM   #186
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Requiem View Post
Putting that English degree of her/his to work!
It must be rough being an eternal sore ass.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 12:40 PM   #187
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
If that's the case then apply it everywhere: Alcohol purchases, pets, children, knife ownership, gas stoves, electricity.

This is more anti-gun hypocrisy, which is what I smelled to begin with with your line of questioning.

Odd how asking someone to spend $5 on a state ID to verify their identity before voting is a disenfranchisement of constitutional rights but forcing gun insurance isn't.
This is funny on two levels. Actually three, since we're also talking about gun legislation.

Attached Images
File Type: jpg straw-man.jpg (19.8 KB, 20 views)
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 12:42 PM   #188
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
This is funny on two levels. Actually three, since we're also talking about gun legislation.

Weren't you just whining about drive-bys?
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 12:43 PM   #189
peacepipe
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,993

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
If that's the case then apply it everywhere: Alcohol purchases, pets, children, knife ownership, gas stoves, electricity.

This is more anti-gun hypocrisy, which is what I smelled to begin with with your line of questioning.

Odd how asking someone to spend $5 on a state ID to verify their identity before voting is a disenfranchisement of constitutional rights but forcing gun insurance isn't.
That's probably because the right to vote is absolute,the 2nd amendment is not absolute & can be regulated.
peacepipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 12:48 PM   #190
TonyR
Franchise Poster
 
TonyR's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 18,735
Default

Hey nyuk, have you come up with responses to the questions in the post linked below? Or are you going to keep pretending you're not dodging?

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpos...&postcount=167
TonyR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 01:05 PM   #191
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Already answered. Not playing games. Loaded, irrelevant political questions.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 01:05 PM   #192
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacepipe View Post
That's probably because the right to vote is absolute,the 2nd amendment is not absolute & can be regulated.
If the right to vote was absolute, we couldn't bar felons from voting.

Still misquoting Heller?
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 01:11 PM   #193
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacepipe View Post
That's probably because the right to vote is absolute,the 2nd amendment is not absolute & can be regulated.
Hilarious. Voting is the only really and truly fundamental right. I guess if you believe all power and authority flow from government that makes a little bit of sense.

I guess by extension, since non-citizens can't vote then, we can assume the Constitution doesn't apply to non-citizens. Awesome. I'm learning so much about government from these guys lately.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 01:13 PM   #194
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
Hilarious. Voting is the only really and truly fundamental right. I guess if you believe all power and authority flow from government that makes a little bit of sense.

I guess by extension, since non-citizens can't vote then, we can assume the Constitution doesn't apply to non-citizens. Awesome. I'm learning so much about government from these guys lately.
We're not allowed to check identity to verify non-citizens can't vote, he's saying. Democrats even screamed about ID checks to vote in states like Texas that were offering free state IDs to people.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 01:21 PM   #195
peacepipe
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,993

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
If the right to vote was absolute, we couldn't bar felons from voting.

Still misquoting Heller?
Pointing out the parts of Heller you ignore is not misquoting.
peacepipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 01:27 PM   #196
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 
Zimm to HOF

Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 36,646
Default

You can already sue someone if they injure you. The mechanism for houghtams scenario already in place. guns no different then any other thing a person could use to injure another person. We can't have a system where you need liability insurance for every thing. If you accidently shoot someone in your home, homeowners insurance may be liable. Funny because Houghtam doesn't care illegals have no car insurance. He's worried about guns when the facts say gun crimes and violence way way down since the 1990's.
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 01:31 PM   #197
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cutthemdown View Post
You can already sue someone if they injure you. The mechanism for houghtams scenario already in place. guns no different then any other thing a person could use to injure another person. We can't have a system where you need liability insurance for every thing. If you accidently shoot someone in your home, homeowners insurance may be liable. Funny because Houghtam doesn't care illegals have no car insurance. He's worried about guns when the facts say gun crimes and violence way way down since the 1990's.
The facts also say gun ownership is down since then too.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 01:33 PM   #198
Pony Boy
"Whoa Nellie"
 
Pony Boy's Avatar
 
Omaha !!!

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,615

Adopt-a-Bronco:
mellon head
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
It's perfectly relevant. If you are liable for death or injury due to an accident with a firearm, but cannot pay, the financial burden is shifted to the victim, the hospital and the taxpayers, none of whom should have any responsibility to pay for YOUR mistake.

That is why gun owners should be required to purchase liability insurance for their firearms.
Great idea, if criminals are required by law to purchase liability insurance it would certainly protect citizens during a break-in or armed robbery.
Pony Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 01:43 PM   #199
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,396
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pony Boy View Post
Great idea, if gun owners are required by law to purchase liability insurance it would certainly help victims of accidents for which they're found liable.
Thank you for saying so, you're so nice!
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 02:16 PM   #200
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
Thank you for saying so, you're so nice!
Who's going to insure all those guns our government sold to Mexican cartels?

Anyway, a majority of violent crimes in the US are carried out with weapons other than firearms (if any) (knives, blunt objects, etc)

Therefore we'll need knife insurance. Baseball bat insurance. Rope insurance. Lead pipe insurance. Candlestick insurance. Basically the whole weapons list in Clue...
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:58 PM.


Denver Broncos