but in your case, as you said you weren't in medical danger. His wife was in danger and the doctor was like: "So? What do you want me to do about it?"

It's not really a personhood law, it's a portion of the Wrongful Death law that defines what a person is. I'm guessing you could ban abortion and still not recognize a fetus as a person for the purposes of wrongful death.

It's not really brilliant, it's an obvious legal move: "the law says that this case by definition can't be wrongful death". It's also terribly hypocritical. It can be both. They could have probably argued that they weren't responsible and gotten off also.

I think that no matter where you are in the world, the people in Walmart will be the same. If they open a Walmart in Manhattan with prices that are 500% higher than the standard Walmart you will still see world's trashiest people inside.

I always get an image of going into the Walmart at my college and seeing a family of 4 generations walking around, all of them overweight and rolling their eyes at the cantankerous granny in the motorized cart terrorizing the college students.

Where does sponsorship money come from? Why sponsor golf tournaments? Did you miss my first comment in this thread?

Way to completely ignore the reality of the argument. Where does the payout come from? The magic leprechaun that hangs out at the 18th green?

As a country we pay very little in taxes, particularly the super wealthy. A vast majority of that essential.

*slow clap*

I saw RG3 related license plates before last years draft in VA.

If it was really a conspiracy they wouldn't have to rush anything, they'd be ready, amirite? Politicians don't gain much because its a typical hardline right issue: our way or the highway, compromise is for wimps. The only legislation that will pass is completely ineffective giving the right more fodder to criticize…

No argument from me, but devil's advocate: if you think all arms are good arms, why not sacrifice some aesthetics for the good of the cause?

I don't understand the notion of suspending kids that threaten others. Shouldn't they be enrolled in some in school therapy? If you suspend them you're sending them home shamed where they can arm themselves and return.

They aren't banned. The ban expired almost a decade ago. You can own automatic weapons if you get special permits.

So that only rifles that require some sort of action to reload ate allowed? Makes sense, butwhy would a gun person want to point this out? Why not let them make more pointless laws and then applaud when the do nothing?

Your strategy therefore is, if you don't like what someone said, pretend they said something else and respond to that.

The new troll method: say something brief and asinine begging for a snarky response then give a 10k word infodump full of skewed facts and hope that no one can reply.

Pretty sure a private school can do whatever it pleases with it's money, also.

Quick story: a police officer friend of mine posted an article from independent review that said that "NBC admitted that no assault rifles were used in the sandy hook shooting." Their evidence? A video released the day after the incident that they claim has more veracity than the police cheif's summary 3 days later. …

Are we having a discussion? It seems like a pro gun control person suggests something and then the antiguncontrol person says: second amendment, more guns, better people. The problem is the anti side sees no need to compromise. I'm worried about the concessions the gun control side will have to make to pass this…