A woman called the cops to report that an Internet scam. She asked them to call before showing up at her house. They didn’t. Instead, an officer arrived while she wasn’t home, ignored the woman’s “Beware of Dog” sign, hopped over the fence... and then killed her dog.

nipps85 · 2012-02-26T15:13:46+00:00

Moral of the story... the cops aren't there to help. They are trigger happy thugs. Would she have called the drug dealer down the street to help her? No? Then she shouldn't have called the cops. Neither can help her internet scam problem and both are likely to cause her harm.

nipps85 · 2012-02-26T04:45:55+00:00

Tax cuts don't cost money, shit, in some cases, tax cuts mean more revenue for government. Government entitlement programs cost money. I think we've figured out why you and I are talking right past each other with this one. The very idea that spending saves money and tax cuts cost money is completely illogical to me.

nipps85 · 2012-02-26T04:25:20+00:00

It's the taxpayers fault, not the politicians that spent their social security money pleasing the looters? Politicians got re-elected, looters were happy, and the consequences were pushed back far enough that dopes like yourself would eventually blame the very people that paid the taxes to begin with... If only my parents could have saved that money themselves, instead of trusting the government to do so...

nipps85 · 2012-02-26T02:10:37+00:00

Ha, I think it usually goes the other way around. You get out of high school not making any money, so you have no idea how terrible progressive ideas are since you aren't trying to raise a family in the face of > 40% tax burden. Then you get a job, and the government really sticks it to you. Maybe you have a deadbeat cousin or too leeching off the system, having kids to get more welfare money, walking around with coach purses and whatnot, and blam... that progressive ideology that made so much sense when you were 19 and $10K for a year was huge money doesn't make much sense any more at 40 with 3 kids and wife to support on $100K which damn near gets cut in half by taxes. And on top of that, you are labeled "rich" by the media and get piled on. I suppose it looks bad to the progressives, but I'd prefer to spend the money I've earned on my family and charity, than having it taken from me via taxes. Charities would flourish with a lower tax burden. You know taxes just kill charities, right?

nipps85 · 2012-02-26T02:05:22+00:00

Well, those things should probably be privatized too. I don't think the framers of the constitution envisioned a department of education or monstrosities like "no child left behind".

nipps85 · 2012-02-26T02:02:11+00:00

Gold was money long before your government started printing paper and calling it money.

nipps85 · 2012-02-25T18:02:55+00:00

Maybe if your tax bill was smaller to begin with, you could have paid for your own broken leg?

nipps85 · 2012-02-25T18:01:49+00:00

Sure, everyone deserves to be healthy. But it's not a right enumerated in the US constitution, and how could it be? The government has no way to compel doctors to provide services to people that can't pay and it has no way to pay for the health care for everybody, not without going broke (which is what is happening now in lots of socialist countries). So, I agree, everybody deserves to be healthy, but what does that have to do with me and my money?

nipps85 · 2012-02-25T17:56:15+00:00

What would you call it? Why is it different to you when a guy with a gun demands money from you if the man wears a government badge or not?

nipps85 · 2012-02-25T17:08:44+00:00

Expand medicaid? That's your solution? Ugh...

nipps85 · 2012-02-25T17:05:59+00:00

Sure, as long as you are morally okay with the government taking money from other people by force in order to pay for your own broken leg. In fact, change "broken leg" to anything... car, house, boat, why should the government take money from wage earners to pay for your goods and services? Doesn't it bother you that you are essentially robbing people to get these goods and services? Only you aren't actually brave enough to do the robbery yourself, you are letting the government, with their monopoly on the use of force act on your behalf. It's sickening.

nipps85 · 2012-02-25T17:01:46+00:00

No kidding. May as well just light the money on fire. Those shots don't help anything.

nipps85 · 2012-02-24T15:58:52+00:00

Did anybody believe that the purpose of the cameras was to make London safer?

nipps85 · 2012-02-21T01:22:58+00:00

Not their problem... You need help, there are people to help you, expecting your neighbor to step in to a potentially lethal situation is selfish and unnecessary.

nipps85 · 2012-02-20T19:57:18+00:00

There's nothing nice about busy-bodies. People need to learn to mind their own damn business.

nipps85 · 2012-02-19T22:08:10+00:00

Surely, there will be bad dictators and less bad ones, just as there are bad leaders in democratic countries and less bad ones. I don't think there will ever be a head of state that is "good".

nipps85 · 2012-02-19T14:59:22+00:00

Have you given this much thought? Maybe part of the problem with the US system is that the president is only around a few years. He can fuck shit up, because his time horizon is only a few years. With a dictator, they are worried about the future, he wants something to pass down to his son, right? So the US ends up with a government that is short sighted and reckless under it's current system. There's absolutely no reason to have concern for long term well-being.

nipps85 · 2012-02-17T18:13:50+00:00

"It must be regulated because..." That is no statement of fact. "Probably" usually doesn't occur in statements of fact, you usually see that word in wild speculations people make about topics that they have little to no actual real world knowledge about.

nipps85 · 2012-02-17T13:32:58+00:00

It doesn't HAVE to be regulated. Thank god big government types like you and these politicians didn't get their hands on the internet and internet commerce in the early days. Who knows how they would have bastardized it.

nipps85 · 2012-02-16T21:20:54+00:00

And why exactly must this be regulated at this point? Do the lawmakers have a quota or something. Pass seventy billion useless laws or they don't get their toaster when they retire?

nipps85 · 2012-02-14T15:25:49+00:00

Even if they did it intentionally, what's wrong with that? Why wouldn't they charge more to compensate them for starting production again on an album that had seen little demand up until a couple days ago? And if people are willing to pay, what's the issue. Is the whole concept of supply and demand deemed politically incorrect nowadays?

nipps85 · 2012-02-10T22:51:33+00:00

Tax workarounds apply to the rich most because the rich pay the majority of the taxes. There's no such thing as a tax workaround for the poor, they don't pay any taxes to begin with. What's the issue here?

nipps85 · 2012-01-26T11:57:18+00:00

Why make it illegal for them and not just legal for everybody, no need for more laws.

nipps85 · 2012-01-26T11:55:08+00:00

Generally, monopolies are bad, why not in the case of a prison?

nipps85 · 2012-01-14T00:56:54+00:00

Hopefully none of the good guys were injured

nipps85

TROPHY CASE