Sandy Hook Victims’ Families Blame Bushmaster in Lawsuit for Shooting

By and | December 16, 2014

  • December 16, 2014 at 1:22 pm
    agent2 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Unfortunately, Mrs. Lanza was responsible here: She had a mentally ill son who had access to these weapons. She even bought them for him. What was she thinking?

    As long as poor judgment is still around, so to, will awful events like this.

    I am sick for those families and can’t imagine their grief.

  • December 16, 2014 at 1:33 pm
    Farmer John says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I guess I’m not surprised by this, just dissapointed. I feel terrible for the families, I too would be very angry and hurt, I don’t blame them at all for feeling that way, I can’t imagine what they’ve gone through. But you simply cannot blame the manufacturer for the unintended use of it’s products, whether it’s a semi-automatic firearm, a Prius or a cell phone.I wish I had an answer to the problem but I don’t think I or anybody else does or will have in the near future.Like the flat earth crowd, the anti gunners tend to play real loose with the facts to get attention. The “Bushmaster” wasn’t designed for our military or the military would be using them. There’s many versions of the AR-15, it just happens that’s the one he used. Unfortunately, it appears as though there may be an increasing need for civilians to have access to those types of weapons in the not too distant future.As we see the religious nut-jobs do things like the cafe in Australia and the charming folks in the Taliban and their senseless slaughter of innocent kids,an armed civilian may be able to at least partially thwart an attack.According to the experts, we will see that kind of thing happen here eventually. I sure wish we wouldn’t,but I think it’s inevitable. If we could just snap our fingers and instantly eliminate all guns and religion, we may have a way to go. Until then, we’re screwed.

    • December 19, 2014 at 6:52 pm
      Don't Call Me Shirley says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      FJ, I agree on all points. Centrist common sense.

  • December 16, 2014 at 1:37 pm
    bob says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act will no doubt apply in this case and prevent it from progressing very far. just like holding liquor or auto manufacturers liable in an auto accident involving a drunk driver, this won’t fly. and shouldn’t.

    • December 16, 2014 at 2:22 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Bob, have you noticed that every time there is a shooting somewhere, the left screams for more gun control. They call for gun free zones. The thing is that many shootings occur in gun free zones since the perps don’t seem to get that message. They can get their guns on the street corner so strict gun control legislation does no good. Chicago is the best example of strict gun control and they have more murders by gun than any other city by a wide margin. This case should go nowhere.

      • December 16, 2014 at 2:52 pm
        Rosenblatt says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        Just because people can get and use guns in CHI when there are strict gun control laws on the books doesn’t mean we should get rid of gun control altogether.

        After all, just because people can get and use heroin now when we have strict drug laws on the books doesn’t mean we should just go ahead and make heroin legal.

        • December 16, 2014 at 4:52 pm
          Agent says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Just because we have the occasional shootings in this country does not mean we have to ban all weapons and create gun free zones that perps ignore. They have a big advantage knowing that people cannot defend themselves. We can’t even protect our soldiers on bases because they are not allowed to carry weapons, hence Major Hassan yelling out Allah Akbar while shooting our defenseless soldiers.

          • December 17, 2014 at 8:00 am
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Umm – I’m pretty confident nobody on this forum nor anyone in the USA is looking to ban all weapons.

            That would require a change to Amendment 2 of the Constitution, and I haven’t heard anything indicating that’s being considered.

            So, yeah, I agree – we don’t have to ban all weapons.

  • December 16, 2014 at 1:52 pm
    PM says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Interesting perspective. Your perspective on responsibility makes sense. What happened was horrible! If the gun manufacturer is responsible, then so is the parents of the group that trained their children to be free thinkers and give them the passion to grow their knowledge and express ideas.

    However without religion and guns, the good ‘ole USA would not be here.

    The horror of what happened can’t be expressed in words, but blaming the manufacturer for unintended use of a gun sets a really bad precedent. Then look at cars that drive to fast or motorcycles that fall over, etc.

    • December 16, 2014 at 2:27 pm
      Ben says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Are you referring to Farmer John, Bob or Agent? Does not make sense

  • December 16, 2014 at 2:00 pm
    TRex says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    So, the rifle that was pulled out of the car trunk AFTER the shooting is the subject of the lawsuit? Video and witness reports consistently showed and specified that the shooter used only handguns. While I hate to seem insensitive to the families which lost loved ones (because I am not), the highly politicized “assault weapon” definition is the real issue being pursued by an ignorant (aka deliberately misleading) anti-gun cohort here. This is like suing the Mack truck company when an assailant mows down pedestrians in a Chevy Camaro, because the plaintiffs really don’t like Mack trucks, because they “look dangerous” – and therefore were clearly only designed for running down as many people as possible. Never mind that a Mack truck wasn’t used, or that it is no more a true “assault weapon” than the rifle that police pulled from Lanza’s car trunk. The danger (and true disservice) that the plaintiff’s lawyers are creating for the victims, is that when the real issues (such as mental illness, gross negligence and malpractice of mental health practitioners) are ignored, then the Mack truck companies of the world will become tired of being used as political punching bag… which will then lead legal defenders to a very appropriate, thorough and long overdue examination of the facts. However, the facts and forensic details of this entire event are something that very few authorities wish to have thoroughly examined.

    • December 16, 2014 at 4:12 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      So are TRex and ReTread the same people or is this a situation where two people wrote nearly identical comments?

      If the former – why?

      If the latter – were these ideas cut and pasted from an outside source only to be regurgitated here?

  • December 16, 2014 at 2:03 pm
    Joe Altobellis says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    If this politically correct, money-grubbing, totally frivolous lawsuit doesn’t SCREAM for major, effective Tort Reform, then nothing does. These hypocritical lawyers, with their self-serving means of lining their pockets, predicated upon the victims’ loss, turns my stomach. This country needs to wake up to what the Legal Industry is doing: raping the citizens with deceit and lies, all in the name of their idea of justice……while they laugh back and forth to the bank.

    • December 17, 2014 at 12:21 pm
      Trust me I am not a liberal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      And, DICK Blumenthal is just that…I am from Newtown, CT, and you can trust me when I say that he has done NOTHING for our town, our state and now, our country. He is a greasy haired, slimy, showboater, and nothing less.

  • December 16, 2014 at 2:04 pm
    reality bites says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Darn that President Bushmaster. Never voted for him or his pappy, Bushmeister.

    • December 16, 2014 at 5:56 pm
      Farmer John says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Another good point Reality, I wonder how the anti’s would respond if it was called an Obamamaster?

  • December 16, 2014 at 2:24 pm
    ReTread says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Are we talking about the rifle that was pulled from the trunk…after the shooting, even when video and witness reports consistently showed and specified that the shooter used only handguns. While I hate to seem insensitive to the families which lost loved ones (because I am not), the highly politicized “assault weapon” definition is the real issue being pursued by an ignorant (aka deliberately misleading) anti-gun cohort here. This is like suing the Mack truck company when an assailant mows down pedestrians in a Chevy Camaro, because the plaintiffs really don’t like Mack trucks, because they “look dangerous” – and therefore were clearly only designed for running down as many people as possible. Never mind that a Mack truck wasn’t used, or that it is no more a true “assault weapon” than the rifle that police pulled from Lanza’s car trunk. The danger (and true disservice) that the plaintiff’s lawyers are creating for the victims, is that when the real issues (such as mental illness, gross negligence and malpractice of mental health practitioners) are ignored, then the Mack truck companies of the world will become tired of being used as political punching bag… which will then lead legal defenders to a very appropriate, thorough and long overdue examination of the facts. However, the facts and forensic details of this entire event are something that very few authorities wish to have thoroughly examined.

    • December 16, 2014 at 4:13 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      So are TRex and ReTread the same people or is this a situation where two people wrote nearly identical comments?

      If the former – why?

      If the latter – were these ideas cut and pasted from an outside source only to be regurgitated here?

      • December 16, 2014 at 4:47 pm
        Both says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        The prob was that the site seemed to be blocking the comment, so I had to re-paste using a different handle after it stated that the comment was duplicate. Lo and behold, they posted the first and the second after all! Innocent mistake of duplicate posting, when I thought it was necessary to overcome perceived censorship. My bad.

        • December 16, 2014 at 5:05 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Hahaha, well, that makes a ton of sense. Thanks for explaining that (no sarcasm intended, just in case anyone thought I wasn’t being sincere here!)

    • December 16, 2014 at 5:57 pm
      Farmer John says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Sue the trunk!

  • December 16, 2014 at 2:27 pm
    Questionning says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The difference between the examples of an automatic weapon and the other examples provided (cars, alcohol, motorcycles) is that their intended use is not to kill or maim. That gun was used for its intended purpose, and only ONE entity profited from its purchase….the manufacturer. If they want to accept the profits, they have to accept the liabilities. My convictions will comfort me as I watch the thumbs down numbers rise on this comment. But it needed to be said!

    • December 16, 2014 at 2:54 pm
      Celtica says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Questionning — right on! The only reason for automatic weapons are solely intended to inflict death on multiples of people. After all, would you waste those bullets on hunting? No. People? Not a problem in the NRA’s eyes.

    • December 16, 2014 at 3:10 pm
      farmer john says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      I see your point,but if some idiot runs my kid over while yapping on their cell phone I’m going to be as pissed as if they shot ’em.

      • December 16, 2014 at 5:02 pm
        Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        farmer, you are starting to make sense. What is up with you? Cell use and texting while driving is a huge problem causing accidents and deaths in this country by both young and older drivers who are married to their cell. They are much like Alchoholics thinking they can handle it. It is an addiction and they don’t even recognize how dangerous it is.

        • December 17, 2014 at 8:11 am
          Ron says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Agent,

          If we are to live in a free country, we have to accept the fact that bad things will happen. Whether it is a drunk driver, someone texting while driving, or using a gun, unfortunate deaths are going to occur.

          The government cannot protect us with laws and regulations so please stop advocating for more.

          • December 17, 2014 at 10:51 am
            Celtica says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Alrightly then, just throw that Patriot Act down the drain…if we live in a free country, then terrorists have a right to as do they please. We don’t need no stinkin’ laws…

            PS: That little Triangle Shirtwaist Fire spurred laws and regulations for worker safety. You — or at least someone you know if you know anyone — has been the beneficiary of these laws.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangle_Shirtwaist_Factory_fire

  • December 16, 2014 at 3:09 pm
    Linda says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    People who don’t understand firearms shouldn’t comment because you’re supposed argument shows your ignorance. They are SEMI automatic rifles. Only ignorant people think that the only reason this gun is manufactured is for killing people. Grow up, educate yourselves and step outside of your limited thinking bubble world.

    • December 16, 2014 at 4:48 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Linda, the gun control freaks abound, primarily in blue states. They are of the opinion that guns kill people, not people killing people. I have a partner who is a real hunter and clay shooter. He hunts everything from ducks to deer. He has an AR-15 to do deer hunting and hog hunting. To say this weapon is only used for killing people because it is an assault rifle is ludicrous. The last time I checked, he hasn’t killed anyone. He is an expert and has been trained. We should be blaming Lanza’s mother for buying the weapon for a mentally deranged son. She paid for that mistake with her life.

      • December 16, 2014 at 4:53 pm
        Both says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        Once again – people forgetting the added fact that the rifle wasn’t actually used! It was found in the trunk of the car later. Pistols were the weapons used by the perp – as captured on video and witness comments.
        Soooooo…… this entire discussion should be 100% MOOT!

        • December 16, 2014 at 5:50 pm
          Celtica says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Christmas is still a week away.
          Keep wishing.

        • December 17, 2014 at 10:18 am
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          I struggle to understand why 8 people would down-vote this factually accurate comment

    • December 16, 2014 at 4:57 pm
      Celtica says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Oh (!) they are only SEMI automatic weapons. Well, in that case, I stand corrected. Because semi automatic are so much safer and not designed to automatically kill people, only semi automatically designed to kill people.

      I believe in the right to bear arms. The right to bear Uzi’s? Not so much.

  • December 16, 2014 at 4:22 pm
    Go figure says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I must be using mine wrong then as I keep shooting paper targets only and for sport and competition. I had no idea it could only be used for one thing. Nothing in the paperwork told me that. I am not really sure why it matters. If someone decides to do harm and uses whatever tool they choose, gun, truck with explosives, knives, car, then it is the person who is responsible and not the tool used. Seriously. When was the last time they prosecuted a vehicle due to the operator? Sued a hammer manufacturer because someone used it to hit someone? I just don’t understand blaming an inanimate object.

    • December 16, 2014 at 5:05 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      How about the axe that the perp used on the cop in NY? Is it the fault of the axe or the Muslim extremist trying to kill the cop. I am glad the other officers took care of that perp so we didn’t have to support him in jail for 50 years.

    • December 17, 2014 at 8:26 am
      Ron says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Go Figure,

      It is really quite simple. Just consider the intended purpose for each tool.

      There are not blaming or prosecuting the gun in this case. They are holding the manufacturer responsible for making something that is designed to kill multiple targets in a short time frame and that is what happened.

      • December 17, 2014 at 10:07 am
        Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        Ron, any repeating rifle or an automatic pistol like a Glock can kill multiple targets in a short time. A typical Glock has 14 in the clip and one in the chamber. They are useful when a perp is coming at you. There is no way the manufacturer should be sued because some deranged individual gets hold of it and does his deed.

        • December 17, 2014 at 10:32 am
          Ron says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Agent,

          I just want to know why these firearms were ever made available to the general public by the manufacturer. If killing multiple targets in a short time frame is not what these “tools” were intended, then tell me what purpose thay serve. Other “tools” used to kill, autos, knives, axes, hammers, etc., have other positive uses for which they were originally intended. THAT ios the point.

          Please tell us your plan to stop deranged individuals from getting their hands on a weapon that is designed to kill multiple targets in a short time frame without invading the privacy of law abiding citizens.

          This ought to be interesting.

          • December 17, 2014 at 3:37 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Ron, you and the other gun controllers have already lost this fight, but don’t know it. What difference does it make if one has an AR-15 or a Winchester? both can fire one bullet at a time. It might surprise you to know that people actually enjoy target shooting. It keeps them sharp for when they need to defend themselves. My plan to keep deranged individuals from acquiring these weapons is to lock them up in a mental institution and to crack down on the illegal gun runners selling them on the streets. I certainly wouldn’t be giving them to the Mexican cartels like your President did and get our border agent killed with them.

          • December 17, 2014 at 4:15 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Agent “They can get their guns on the street corner so strict gun control legislation does no good”

            Agent “My plan…[is] to crack down on the illegal gun runners selling them on the streets.”

            So you want to crack down on illegal gun runners, but you don’t believe strict gun control legislation does any good. These statements appear contradictory. Please advise if I am mistaken.

          • December 17, 2014 at 4:49 pm
            Ron says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Agent,

            How are you going to identify the deranged before they committ a crime? How much is it going to cost to lock up the deranged and are you and the rest of the Republicans going to pay for the mental institutions? I don’t want my taxes going up, do you?

            I never said I was for gun control. I just question why they were manufactured and sold to the general public to begin with. You have yet to address that point because you cannot. Target shooting does not count.

          • December 17, 2014 at 5:41 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Ron, I will catch you and Rosenblatt on the same post since you are both of the same mind. Rosenblatt, can you tell me how strict gun control has been effective in this country slowing down the thugs who pay no attention whatsoever to any controls? Do you think that creating gun free zones have been effective? Did you realize that the Virginia Tech campus was a gun free zone and look what happened there. Any school campus is a gun free zone. Teachers weren’t able to defend themselves or the kids so it is a rich environment for a crazed perp to do his thing.

            Ron, this country has had a history going back to the Pilgrims of having guns to hunt with to provide meat to their families to live on. We have a large population who still likes to hunt for about every kind of game in season. The Constitution gives Americans the right to bear arms. You like to talk about demand on the economy. If there wasn’t a demand for the product, the guns would not be manufactured and sold. People now think they may need their guns to defend themselves from the growing power of the Federal Government who continues to impose its will on the people.

          • December 17, 2014 at 8:11 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Hi Agent! Did you once again fail to answer my question, ask me to prove the opposite of what I asked you, and expect me to answer three questions of yours? Yup.

            You just got done telling me “Here is a hint for you….don’t abstain or vote present or parse words. Just answer one way or the other and you will fare much better.”

            You claim in one post you are against gun control laws and then claim you’d use those gun control laws to crack down on illegal gun runners.

            I can’t understand if you are for or against gun control laws.

            Which is it?

            Once you answer either PRO (we need the laws to catch illegal sales of firearms) or CON (gun control laws do no good) or BOTH (and explain how those aren’t contradictory positions) I’ll be happy to answer your questions.

          • December 17, 2014 at 8:39 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            You know what, Agent? I will answer your questions as if you fail to answer mine it will just prove what I’ve thought all along: you just troll away here and it’s pointless to try to have a serious and intelligent discussion with you.

            “Can you tell me how strict gun control has been effective in this country slowing down the thugs who pay no attention whatsoever to any controls?”

            SURE! Just think about it for a second: if we don’t keep some of those laws on the books, then people like Future-Agent won’t be able “to crack down on the illegal gun runners selling them on the streets.” Seems like I shouldn’t need to justify to you that laws you admitted would help in your grand scheme is something that is actually useful.

            “Do you think that creating gun free zones have been effective?”
            Yes. I’d elaborate but you previously said I should just answer one way or another, so that’s what I did.

            “Did you realize that the Virginia Tech campus was a gun free zone…”
            Yes. I’d elaborate, but….see above answer

            I am still looking forward to hearing if you are for or against gun control laws since I believe you made two completely contradictory statements.

          • December 18, 2014 at 7:43 am
            Ron says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Rosenblatt,

            That is Agent’s MO when he is backed into a corner and cannot respond to a challenge.

            Agent,

            You never answered my questions regarding your plan to lock up all of the deranged people.

            I will make this as clear as possible, GUNS WERE INVENTED TO KILL!!!! Please tel me when I opposed the right to bear arms.

            If you want to discuss the 2nd Amendment, please cite the entire passage, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” You tell me what well regulated Militia your are a part of and you may have any gun you want.

          • December 18, 2014 at 11:56 am
            Stan says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Agent, should people be allowed to have grenades? What about a machine gun? An uzi? Anthrax?

          • December 19, 2014 at 8:23 am
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Hey Ron – looks like Agent probably isn’t going to provide an answer to our questions once again, just like what’s happened in the past in other threads.

            If that holds up, I’d highly suggest we stop falling for his troll bait posts and stop attempting to have logical conversations with him.

            Just my 2 cents – do whatever the h3ll you want :)

            Happy holidays to all!

          • December 19, 2014 at 4:07 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Sorry I didn’t get back to you sooner Ron, Rosenblatt. I actually have a business to run and customers to service and can’t blog 24/7 like you apparently can. I find it amusing that you are so frustrated that I don’t answer each and every question you pose. I’m sorry I don’t fit into your canned answer responses. You Progressives think you are smarter than Conservatives. If you were so smart, you wouldn’t have voted for Obama twice.

            I will use your didn’t answer my question response. How has Chicago fared with the strictest gun control laws in the country? Has it lowered the murder rate? Why isn’t Emanuel chasing the thugs down and bringing them to justice? Words on paper do not control the thugs on the street. All it has done is make it harder for legal citizens to protect themselves. There is no contradiction on my position. Yes, you are mistaken.

            Tell me Ron, what Department of Mental Health
            has identified deranged people to the Police that might prevent a mass shooting? Apparently, there is never a warning sign strong enough to prevent it?

          • December 19, 2014 at 4:42 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Agent – feel like trolling some more, huh?

            You don’t have time to post here, but you have plenty of time to post dozens of comments on other articles on this site today.

            “I’m sorry I don’t fit into your canned answer responses”

            I do not accept your apology. When I didn’t give you a simple “yes or no” you responded by insulting me for not being able to give you a simple answer.

            I’m not upset you didn’t answer all my questions.
            There was only one question. You still haven’t answered it.

            Let me try this again.

            ******
            Are you for gun control laws or against them?
            I am for gun control laws
            I am against gun control laws
            Those are your choices
            Pick one and answer the question
            Don’t parse words
            Just answer one way or another
            You will fare much better
            ****

          • December 19, 2014 at 4:44 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Typical. You still didn’t answer the question. Troll.

          • December 22, 2014 at 3:42 pm
            Ron says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Agent,

            On one hand your solution to gun violence is to lock up deranged people. Then you criticize the Department of Mental Health for not identifying and reporting deranged people to the police. Sounds like you are against your own solution.

  • December 16, 2014 at 5:11 pm
    Both says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Celtica sounds like a troll for the Soros foundation, Bloomberg and the DNC, because no rational human would otherwise take such an ignorant, hard-line political stance without pure political motivation. Look at the videos Celtica. The Bushmaster wasn’t even used, so why not focus your attack on the mental health practitioners that failed in their duties. A screwed up, evil person will use any means necessary to inflict harm on others. In this case, the focus of your venom wasn’t even a factor in the crime. Fact checking is really a pain in the arse, but give it a try sometime. Even the media sources to this day continue to spout mis-truths about this event, because issuing retractions screws up the engineered narrative.

    • December 16, 2014 at 5:46 pm
      Celtica says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      So sorry, Both, didn’t realize you were present that day in Connecticut. My bad.

      Yeah about that fact checking… Did you know that Nancy Lanza was a member of the NRA? So even supposedly sane people are kinda stupid when it comes to their sick kids. A lot of people paid a high price for Nancy Lanza’s right to bear arms.

      Speaking of facts: this is the lead sentence in IJ’s article that you so graciously responded to:

      The maker of the military assault rifle used to kill dozens at a Connecticut elementary school was sued almost exactly two years later by the families of 20 first-grade students who died in the mass shooting

      http://www.businessinsider.com/nancy-lanza-nra-certificate-adam-sandy-hook-shooting-2013-12

    • December 19, 2014 at 6:09 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Rosenblatt, feel like trolling some more? How is this for an answer? I am in favor of enforcing gun laws that have been in force for years instead of passing new ones making the laws so strict that legitimate citizens cannot get licensed and able to obtain a weapon for self defense. I am in favor of the Police chasing down, catching the thugs who obtain illegal weapons and re-sell them on the street and confiscate the weapons. Now, you can answer my question about why Chicago has the worst murder rate in the country despite their overbearing gun laws. Don’t parse words, just answer politely with no Progressive idiocy.

      • December 19, 2014 at 8:14 pm
        Rosenblatt says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        Agent, thank you for finally taking a stand and saying, without contradicting other statements you’ve made, that you are for gun control.

        I do not know how I’m supposed to answer your question about CHI’s murder rate. You’re asking me to explain something which cannot be explained and supported by evidence.

        There are a myriad of factors as to why there are more murders there than other places. Are people killing others because of drugs, class warfare, seasonal affective disorder, high recivicism rates, unhappy couples, trolls, gambling debts not being paid….i could go on, but there’s no evidence or statistics that could be reviewed to explain why murders occur.

        I wish i could give you a simple answer and provide a link to the source material backing up my beliefs, but the truth is nobody really knows – one can only theorize as to what’s causing that to happen.

        I’m just being honest that there’s no data for anyone to review to come to a decision that is supported with factual evidence – this is not an excuse for me not answering your question. The alternative would be me BS-ing you and making stuff up. Your question simply cannot be answered with anything factual to support why that’s happening because that evidence does not exist.

        • December 22, 2014 at 6:16 pm
          Agent says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Rosenblatt, perhaps you should Google Alpharetta, Ga and read up on their low murder rate. The citizens there are armed, but it is amazing they have the lowest murder rate of any city their size in America.

          • December 23, 2014 at 11:08 am
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Agent:

            Based on US census data, Illinois has the 4th highest murder rate and Georgia has the 14th highest murder rate.

            I could not find murder rate statistics for every city in the country, only by state.

            You say Alpharetta, GA has a “low” murder rate, but there are 36 other states with a lower murder rate than Georgia. I can’t agree Alpharetta has a low murder rate when more than half of the states in the US have lower murder rates.

            Please advise what source you’re looking at and what the actual numbers are which support your statement that Alpharetta has a “low” murder rate.

          • December 23, 2014 at 8:08 pm
            Stan says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Alpaharetta GA is also not impoverished the same way that South Chicago is. Combine zero income, poor housing, poor opportunities, and the need to sell drugs in order to generate money with guns and you should not be surprised that there is violence.

            That being said, youre really dealing with two seperate arguments: banning guns (this would do most good for Chicago, although I cant say that Im for this approach) and regulating guns (this would solve school shooting problems, or at least help with mental illness controls and central registries. I – – and literally 80% of the nation – – am for this. Only the NRA isnt. So it doesnt happen.)

  • December 16, 2014 at 5:21 pm
    Farmer John says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The best estimates, which admittedly are just that, put the number of AR-15’s at between 3.3 to 3.5 million in the US.If they were truly “designed” and “intended” just for killing people, there’d be a whole lot more mass shootings in the US with them. I happen to have one myself, but I’d be more worried about my Barrett 50 than my AR.I’m personally way more worried about the American Taliban anyway.

  • December 17, 2014 at 11:17 am
    Questionning says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Oh Farmer John ! The Taliban has no interest in going into arm to arm combat with you. I think your Chemical Fertilizer is affecting your well water. They know Americans are all armed and ready, so they are just going to bomb your a$$. Your guns are going to be as useful as that udderless cow you have been trying to milk.

    • December 17, 2014 at 1:07 pm
      farmerjohn says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Sorry questionning, I should have been more specific. When I refer to the “American Taliban”, I’m referring to the real scary one, the likes of the Huckabees, Palins, Sanscrotums,Bachmanns,Perrys etc.By the way, I drink only Iowa’s finest bottled water, I do add some fertilizer on Fridays though after a tough week.Being raised on a farm, I’ve also learned that if your “cow” is udderless, I just milk them through the horns, although production seems to be spotty at best. Thanks for the tips however.

      • December 17, 2014 at 3:42 pm
        Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        It is interesting that you have guns and like them, but are against Republicans who defend the right to bear arms. You should be more afraid of DHS, Obama, Hillary, Warren, Schumer, Reid, Pelosi who want to take your guns away and make you defenseless against the hoarde of illegal thugs they are releasing from prison.

        • December 17, 2014 at 4:52 pm
          Ron says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Agent,

          They do not want to take your guns away. You have fallen for the right’s propoganda in order to get your vote. And you call the left uninformed voters.

          Please start listing all of the legislation that they have proposed that would take away your guns.

        • December 19, 2014 at 2:04 pm
          Farmer John says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          I most definitely am more afraid of Schumer, Billary,Pelosi and the like. I’m just realistic enough to know that complete gun confiscation is not going to happen, I mean who’s going to go knocking on the doors in Wyoming, Montana, Idaho and Alaska asking for their guns? I’m just more concerned about those would legislate based on their beliefs in an imaginary sky fairy, the same sky fairy who allegedly could just eliminate or cure cystic fibrosis, but chooses not to because “he works in mysterious ways”. Absolute untold horrible suffering put upon the children and the parents of these poor innocent children, relieved only by a painful death yet nothing is done by the “benevolent and loving” omnipotent being who could put a stop to it. Mysterious ways indeed.

          • December 19, 2014 at 4:11 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Farmer, did you know that the reason why the Japanese did not invade our west coast in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor was that they realized American citizens were armed and they would get their butt shot off. It took Britain two tries to realize that and they lost both times. Thank God we have the Second Amendment. We can hunt with our guns and we can use them to defend ourselves.

          • December 19, 2014 at 6:11 pm
            Don't Call Me Shirley says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            He can’t heal the children, because he’s too busy helping Tim Tebow get a touchdown. That is more important.

          • December 22, 2014 at 5:01 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Farmer, your post makes no sense. You speak of people letting their children die without medical treatment?? There may be ….001% of the population that believe that way. Most parents take their kid to the doctor for almost anything and get treatment. If they don’t have insurance, they go to the emergency room. Please don’t characterize the population with not caring about their children’s health or blame religion for their choices.

        • December 19, 2014 at 6:09 pm
          Don't Call Me Shirley says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Agent, don’t forget about the murderers that good ‘ol boy Barbour not only released from prison, but gave complete pardons to.

          I agree with the right to gun ownership; I own a couple myself. I do find it hypocritical though, that the Republicans who claim that the problem is with mentally unstable people are the very same people who continually defund mental health facilities, thereby releasing hoardes of insane people into our communities.

          I’m with you, Farmer John. I think insane people are dangerous, such as those who hear voices telling them to do things.

          • December 19, 2014 at 6:13 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Who has been in charge the past 6 years Shirley? By the way, Obama has been releasing illegal thugs by the hoardes for some time now to do their deeds. The left tries to blame the Tea Party for every shooting that occurs. It hasn’t ever been shown yet that this is the case. It is usually an imbalanced Liberal like the one who shot Gabby Gifford.

          • December 19, 2014 at 7:06 pm
            Don't Call Me Shirley says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            The Republicans have been defunding mental healthcare for decades, and they have been in charge of spending recently. Granted, the Democrats haven’t done enough to fight the Republicans on this, but the Republicans are the ones doing the cutting. Even now, they don’t want to allow spending on anything unless it helps the rich. They were the ones blocking funding for the V.A. They loved pointing out the V.A. failures, while at the same time blocking legislation to provide the necessary funding. It was only after their hypocrisy became public that they had a change of heart and suddenly decided to allow the funding for necessary reforms.

      • December 17, 2014 at 4:17 pm
        Questionning says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        Awesome Reply! Thanks for the smile Farmer John!

        • December 18, 2014 at 12:00 pm
          Stan says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Agent, no one wants to take away guns. I personally have several. But its ludicrous to think that there is no registry of mental illness in this nation to keep high powered assault weapons out of the hands of the unstable. This is common sense, not a restriction.

          And for the record, Australia did this already after a mass shooting and it has completely eliminated the problem. So yes, it does work.

          • December 19, 2014 at 4:12 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Yes, we noticed how well it worked in Sydney. They are also revisiting their policy on admitting Muslims to their country.

          • December 23, 2014 at 8:03 pm
            Stan says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            That wasnt a school shooting and less than 5 people were killed. That is pretty remarkable considering the ~5 school shootings the US seems to have every single year.

  • December 18, 2014 at 12:42 pm
    Rosenblatt says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Agent – posting this to you again as its own comment in case you overlooked it as part of multiple replies listed above.

    You claim in one post you are against gun control laws and then claim you’d use those gun control laws to crack down on illegal gun runners.

    I can’t understand if you are for or against gun control laws.

    Which is it?

    You are either FOR gun control laws (your statement of: we need the laws to catch illegal sales of firearms) or AGAINST them (your statement of: gun control laws do no good) or maybe BOTH (but you’ll have to explain how those aren’t contradictory positions).

    Don’t forget your own advice to me: “Here is a hint for you….don’t abstain or vote present or parse words. Just answer one way or the other and you will fare much better.”

    If you fail to take your own advice and can’t simply provide an answer to my question, it will prove what I’ve thought all along: you just troll away here and it’s pointless for anyone to try to have a serious and intelligent discussion with you.

    • December 19, 2014 at 11:39 am
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Keep downvoting me Agent, try to get my comments hidden, and don’t reply to a serious question you can’t answer. That’s cool. I get you now.

      • December 19, 2014 at 2:26 pm
        Libby says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        Finally you have the true essence of Agent, Rosenblatt! Hypocrisy at it’s finest and a troll indeed.

        • December 19, 2014 at 4:18 pm
          Agent says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Libby, let’s identify the trolls. 1. Stan 2. Libby 3. Booger 4. Ron 5. Celtica 6. Rosenblatt 7. Questionning

          Now, everyone can see who the trolls are espousing Progressive Liberalism.

          • December 19, 2014 at 4:44 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Calling me a troll – now THAT is a boss troll move.

            I’ve never been disingenuous. I’ve never made conflicting statements. I’ve never baited anyone into an answer to flip the script so to peak. I’ve only used your own words against you.

          • December 19, 2014 at 4:49 pm
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Agent – in order to even comment on the identity of a troll, it is important to know the definition of a troll – which you do not.

            “Troll” – one who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.”

            This is the epitome of YOU. You are constantly mentioning Obama on article that have nothing to do with Obama (see Uber), posting imflammatory comments only to retreat and then not respond when people call you out (see this article), and change the subject to something totally off-base to keep the discord going (see almost any article you have commented on).

            Posting an opinion with which you do not agree does not a troll make. Troll.

  • December 19, 2014 at 6:19 pm
    Agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Libby, you are the pot calling the kettle black. Your inflammatory,derogatory remarks would make a book the thickness of Obamacare. You don’t listen to anything that refutes the liberal agenda, dismiss factual info provided by many Conservatives on this site, don’t have sound on your computer which is apparently it is so old, you don’t even have virus protection so you hide behind that to not open utubes showing how bad your side has governed. Then, you have the audacity to say Obama has been honest and forthright with the American People. You have believed the big lie of Obama and still do.

    • December 22, 2014 at 1:56 pm
      Insurance Nerd says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Agent, I haven’t always agreed with Libby and did recently defend you when she and Booger) out on their actions when posting your identity. Before you pat yourself on the back, it’s fair to say that I don’t always agree with you either and think your behavior could use improvement as well. But I have to tell you, I couldn’t agree with Libby more than on the post above. Note: you had to throw in Obamacare…which is irrelevant in this context, and what the hell does an old computer without sound or virus protection have to do with anything. If Libby (or anyone else here) wanted to vote for Obama twice, that’s their option – you make it an inflammatory statement because it does not conform with your thoughts…just as you accuse Libby of doing. Regardless of the article, you are typically the first to make sure to veer off course to somehow make it about Obama, progressive trolls, etc., etc. Time to look in the mirror and do a reality check on your own behavior. You can’t write some of the stuff you do and then get your feelings all stuck out and be indignant when someone treats you as you treat them.

      And no, I don’t consider myself the Behavior Police. I would like to come to this forum to read comments about the articles from fellow insurance professionals without all the bashing.

      • December 22, 2014 at 3:52 pm
        Rosenblatt says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        Well said, sir….well said

      • December 22, 2014 at 4:47 pm
        Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        Ins nerd, I used the thickness of Libby’s inflammatory, insulting remarks and her gleeful piling on from the identity problem to Obamacare because the law was 2,700 pages long. Since then, several thousand more pages of regulations have been added. By the way, anyone who was stupid enough to vote for Obama twice in light of his governance doesn’t have much credibility on this forum. It only took Rosenblatt 10 posts to finally agree that what booger, Ins102 and Libby did on my identity was wrong. This was after he parsed words in a number of several paragraph posts. I would like to have comments be about issues as well, but if I post a comment on the subject matter, I am called names like racist, bigot, uninformed troll etc. ad nauseum. I give back in kind. I really don’t care if you disagree with my Conservative opinion or not. The nation is divided right now, not much is going right for the country and the devisive left is responsible for the vast majority of it. The mid terms were a big change in how Americans have turned off Progressive politics. Hopefully, Conservatives will have a chance starting real soon to make a difference in governance. If they don’t, they will be hearing from me.

        • December 23, 2014 at 8:52 am
          Insurance Nerd says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Agent, you have missed my point yet proven it at the same time. I didn’t say I disagree with your Conservative opinion or even make a comment on the state of our country – you went that direction in half of your post. My commentary was about behavior. For all you know, I consider myself a Conservative as well. I just don’t feel the need to rant and twist every conversation to political accusations and call people stupid. And Rosenblatt’s posts regarding your ‘identity theft’ were an attempt to get you to understand that there was a difference between theft and exposure. I have come to the conclusion that you just like to argue for the sake of arguing.

          And Rosenblatt…it would be “ma’am” :)

          • December 23, 2014 at 9:45 am
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Actually Nerd, had you read Rosenblatt’s comments carefully, you would have read that Rosenblatt was parsing words for about 10 posts. He started out saying that he was not saying that what was done to me was right or wrong and he was non-committal in commenting. I called him out about whether he knew right from wrong. 9 posts later after numerous diatribes, he finally admitted that what was done was wrong. By the way, get a load of the Progressive comments on this forum if you want to see bad behavior. They don’t like it much when I call them out so they insult me. I will continue to give it right back to them.

          • December 23, 2014 at 11:16 am
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Sorry Insurance Nerd — ma’am it is!

            And here we go again, Agent, — I intentionally abstained from answering your “is it right or wrong” question until you answered questions I had posed you first.

            I asked you 3 questions, you didn’t answer, asked me something, then got upset at me for not answering your question.

            I kept telling you I was not answering your question until you answered mine. Not that difficult of a concept to understand.

            PS – Google “parse words” and stop using it wrong. The only way to have proper reading comprehension skills is to parse words.

  • December 22, 2014 at 1:57 pm
    Insurance Nerd says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Sorry – first sentence should read “…defend you when she (and Booger) posted your identity”.

    • December 23, 2014 at 11:49 am
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Rosenblatt, all I asked you to do was tell me if you thought it was right or wrong on what booger, Libby & Ins102 did to my identity and then you demanded I answer your three questions. This isn’t rocket science and you should know right from wrong.

      • December 23, 2014 at 12:40 pm
        Rosenblatt says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        Yeah, I demanded you answer the questions I asked you before I answered the subsequent question you asked me.

        You consistently avoid answering my questions and then get upset and insult me when I tell you I won’t bother answering you until you answer me.

        You’re a hypocrite if you sincerely believe it’s right to ignore someone’s question and then insult them for not providing an answer when they’ve already said “I asked you a question first. You reply to me, then I’ll reply to you.”

        This is playground common sense here, bud. Tit-for-tat. Why should I answer your questions when you hadn’t bothered to answer mine?

        • December 23, 2014 at 12:42 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          FYI – There has NEVER been a time where I’ve refused to answer your questions if you asked me first. I only refused to answer you when you had ignored my question and then asked me something in your response.

  • December 22, 2014 at 2:17 pm
    Call me Bob says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I find it amazing how on an insurance site the conversation so quickly moved from the article which was a lawsuit against a firearms manufacturer and all entities in the stream of commerce, to gun control.

    In America anyone can bring suit if they feel they have been wronged and I fully agree with that right. What I do not agree with is the plaintiff bar taking on cases such as this one, which they know full well is in conflict with federal law. Backed by the Brady folks and the hope for a large contingency payment they will tie up valuable court resources and negatively impact all of the firms involved. They love to make it sound like they are taking the moral high ground when every reasonable thinking person knows full well that it is all about greed for the plaintiff attorney in cases such as this one. If we really want to start eliminating frivolous suits such as this make the plaintiff attorney pay all costs out of their pocket when the court finds that the action has no merit under the law.

    We all see far too many claims and suits where the plaintiff has no case but the defendant buckles under the cost and settles rather than continuing to fight for pure economic reasons.
    it frivolous and they have taken the case on a contingency basis.

    • December 22, 2014 at 4:51 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Bob, do you think that dude that assassinated the two cops had a permit and taken all the training for gun ownership? Perhaps the suit should be against the firearm he used, right? By the way, the Commie mayor DeBlasio is really taking the heat now. He walked into the press conference and all the cops there turned their back on him. I would say the morale is pretty low for the Police force in the Big Apple, wouldn’t you say?

      • December 23, 2014 at 1:58 pm
        Call me Bob says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        I guess you missed my point sir. This article has nothing to do with gun control, only greedy lawyers and nothing more.

        As to gun control my definition is: “hitting what you are aiming at”.

        • December 23, 2014 at 3:56 pm
          Agent says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          They asked a cop one time why he shot a dangerous perp 6 times with his revolver after he had been shot at. The cop said, because that is all the bullets I had.

  • December 22, 2014 at 4:40 pm
    Fan of Rosenblatt says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Agent, you are such a tool and Rosenblatt has called you out on the table for it. While this is not the first time someone has called you out for your contradicting statements, derogatory remarks, ect. It is the first time someone has done it with such class and finesse in my opinion.

    You get others to stoop to your level, but you just cannot seem to get Rosenblatt too…and I think that kills you inside! Rosenblatt is smart, thoughtful in his response and is a fair debater. I picture a very classy person and he is very respectful of others, even when others don’t agree with his views. You should really take some lessons from Rosenblatt…but in reality, some people just have class and some are just..well drop the “cl”

    -Rosenblatt’s biggest fan :)

    • December 23, 2014 at 9:51 am
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Hey Fan, Rosenblatt doesn’t call me out on anything. I think it is the other way around. Keep on being a fan if you like. He is a Progressive Liberal and I am Conservative so we often disagree, sometimes vehemently.

      • December 23, 2014 at 11:28 am
        Rosenblatt says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        I am not a Progressive Liberal. I’m a centrist – my beliefs are wholly dependent on the topic at hand. I do not think the country being either far right or far left is any good.

        Healthcare for all? Yes!
        NSA spying on us? No!
        Abortion? Yes!
        No federal college loans, just private loans? Yes!
        Free money to unemployed people who aren’t looking for a job? No!
        Over-spend on multiple wars simultaneously? No!
        Giving driver’s licenses to non-citizens? No!

        Centrist defined: “It’s a political outlook or specific position that involves acceptance or support of a balance of a degree of social equality and a degree of social hierarchy or social inequality; while opposing political changes which would result in a significant shift of society either strongly to the left or the right.”

        • December 23, 2014 at 11:45 am
          Agent says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Healthcare for all? Are you talking Single Payer or Obamacare? Either one is not centrist, but leftist. Perhaps you haven’t seen the polls. Abortion? Including late term or just the early stages or if the mother’s health were in danger? Over spend on multiple wars? We only have one war going on against Terror, but we have several locations in that war. Should we just let the Muslims take over everywhere they are actively trying to kill infidels? I see you are big on “Social Justice” which seems to be very important for leftists. Do you think that releasing the Gitmo detainees is wise policy to go back to killing as they were when they were caught? Please clarify your position.

          • December 23, 2014 at 12:53 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            You clearly don’t understand what a centrist is, even though I provided you with the definition.

            Some of my points were left-leaning, but there were other topics were I was leaning to the right. You must have both left & right tendencies to be considered a centrist. Please re-read the definition I posted earlier while parsing words to understand what it means to be a centrist.

            “Healthcare for all? Are you talking Single Payer or Obamacare?”
            Not single payer – the gov’t shouldn’t be funding it

            “Abortion? Including late term or just the early stages or if the mother’s health were in danger?”
            Whenever they want to. It’s not my place to tell someone what to do with their body.

            “Over spend on multiple wars? We only have one war going on against Terror, but we have several locations in that war.”
            The war on drugs and the war on terror = multiple wars, even if you consider the broad definition of “war on terror” you wrote, there’s still more than one war.

            “Should we just let the Muslims take over everywhere they are actively trying to kill infidels?”
            You serious? Obviously, no.

            Do you think that releasing the Gitmo detainees is wise policy to go back to killing as they were when they were caught? Please clarify your position.
            Not everyone in Gitmo was a terrorist. Innocent people were there too. I think it’s wise to let the innocent people go.

          • December 23, 2014 at 3:19 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Agent – do you agree that based on the definition of a centrist, the various yes/no topics I posted, and by my answers to your clarifying questions, that I’m actually a centrist and not a Progressive Liberal?

            Please note I just answered 4 of your questions (staying on topic, not calling you names or insulting you, and being direct with my answers) and am looking for the same kind of courtesy from you in return.

            If you fail to provide a simple answer, or go off-topic, or hurl insults, you will loose credibility and have no base to stand on should I choose not answer any of your future questions.

            Quite simply: do you agree you were wrong when you called me a Progressive Liberal since I lean to the right and left depending on the topic at hand which, therefore, makes me a centrist?

          • December 23, 2014 at 4:11 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Rosenblatt, you need to view the Muslim dudes on Fox News site today and see if you think those guys are innocent of Terror or trying to kill us. These guys were caught on the battlefield man. These guys should have been tried as combatants by Military tribunal and either executed or given very long terms.

            Your definition of Centrist differs a lot from mine. On Healthcare, I am glad you are not for single payer like Ron is. By the way, did you know that Obamacare took $500 Billion from Medicare as part of its funding? Is that not government paying for healthcare, robbing Peter to pay Paul? A centrist should not be for government mandated healthcare. The problem could have been solved in the private market without 4 years of rancor and opposition from the majority of Americans.

            Killing babies in late term should not be allowed. That is murder by almost any definition if the fetus is viable. It is not just the mother’s body, but a potential human being being killed.

            What war on drugs are you talking about? This country allows tons of drugs to enter this country every year with almost no border security. Is running guns to the cartels ie Fast & Furious what you are talking about?

            If I were a betting man, I would bet you are on the left side of Centrist. How about leaning to the right side of Centrist and you will have more credibility with me.

          • December 23, 2014 at 4:41 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Once again, you failed to answer my question.

            “I would bet you are on the left side of Centrist.”

            What do you mean – left side of centrist? Do you mean (a) I AM a centrist and you think I lean a bit to the left or (b) that I’m NOT a centrist because you think I lean to the left?

            I still don’t know if you think I’m a Progressive Liberal or a Centrist, which is what I asked you. Please try to answer my question again. You can even just write (a) or (b) if you want!

            Also, “How about leaning to the right side of Centrist and you will have more credibility with me.”

            Centrism is not defined by compromise or moderation, it is considerate of them. I understand you want me to lean right and that if I agree with you then you’ll find me credible.

            While that’s an absurd theory and I do not agree someone is only credible when they agree with your viewpoints, let’s presume I agree with you there — I’ve already given you various situations where I am leaning to the right (see private loans and no gov’t handouts to people who are unemployed and not looking for work).

            So you’re asking me to lean right yet I’ve already given you scenarios where that’s exactly what I’m doing.

            So, let’s get back on point and maybe you can simply answer my question this time: do you think (a) I AM a centrist or (b) I’m NOT a centrist?

            If you think I’m a left-leaning centrist, your answer would be A – Rosenblatt is a centrist. If you think I just lean left of center, but that doesn’t make me a centrist and I’m still a Liberal, your answer would be B – Rosenblatt is not a centrist.

            Which one is it?

        • December 23, 2014 at 2:09 pm
          Farmer John says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          Yay for abortions!

          • December 23, 2014 at 2:17 pm
            Perplexed says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Farmer, you are a sick puppy.

          • December 23, 2014 at 3:07 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Kang “Abortions for all!”
            Crowd “Boooooooo”
            Kang “Okay. Abortions for none!”
            Crowd “Booooo”
            Kang “Okay. Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others”
            Crowd “Yay!!!!!!!!!!!!”

          • December 23, 2014 at 6:08 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Rosenblatt, are you a frustrated attorney? You continue to parse just like an attorney. There is no need to give me 8 paragraphs on every post.

            You are not a “Centrist”. You lean left a “lot” more than right. By the way, the left does not compromise on anything. It is their way or the highway. Please cite the examples of the left compromising with the right. Every time the right reaches across the aisle, more Progressive legislation is passed. Have they compromised on spending in the past 6 years? Have they reformed the tax code to make it more fair or have they passed on more tax increases?

          • December 23, 2014 at 6:45 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Yay, you answered my question! That’s all I wanted – an actual response to my question. Was it THAT hard to say you don’t think I’m a centrist, as opposed to your “I bet you lean left centrist” which could mean either of two different things?

            PS – you get paragraphs from me because, like with others here and even within this thread, you don’t comprehend what people are saying and divert conversation away from the question at hand.

            I wouldn’t have to over explain things if you comprehended what was being said in the first place.

            And no, I’m not an attorney.

          • December 24, 2014 at 9:52 am
            Libby says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            I’m getting frustrated just reading these exchanges and am beginning to wonder why we even respond to Agent at all anymore. He’s non-sensical and I’m sorry to say, just not too bright. He offers nothing and adds only divisiveness, rhetoric and insults. He no longer entertains and is getting tired and boring.

  • December 24, 2014 at 9:28 am
    Agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Rosenblatt, we will continue to agree to disagree on just about every issue. You speak a language much like Ron which is northern Blue State. What state are you from? NY,Mass,Ct,Maryland,? By the way, you didn’t answer my question on compromising.

    Merry Christmas & Happy New Year!

    • December 24, 2014 at 9:51 am
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Agent – I am not going to spend time responding to off-topic questions from you that were brought up for apparently no reason.

      This article is about what happened in CT and gun-related matters. The only reason we started talking about left & right ideologies is because you called me a Progressive Liberal and I attempted to explain how that’s not an accurate reflection of my beliefs.

      I never said “the left” was better or worse at compromising than “the right.” You threw that stuff out there for no apparent reason.

      ~~~~

      Please cite the examples of the left compromising with the right.
      **what does this have to do with Sandy Hook & guns?**

      Have they compromised on spending in the past 6 years?
      **what does this have to do with Sandy Hook & guns?**

      Have they reformed the tax code to make it more fair or have they passed on more tax increases?
      **what does this have to do with Sandy Hook & guns?**

      If you asked something relevant about this topic, I’d answer. If you made false statements about me, I’d respond.

      If you just want to ask me questions about items that are way off-topic, I am under no obligation to appease you.

      Let’s try to keep these conversations on point, shall we?

      Care to talk about guns, gun legislation or matters similar to that? I’m in.

      You just want to discuss “the right is better than the left and here’s how”, I’m not in.

      I never said that, I never implied that, and it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

      • December 24, 2014 at 11:56 am
        Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        So don’t answer my questions Rosenblatt. I already know that you are from a blue state that apparently you are not too proud of. You just admitted that you won’t discuss whether the right is better than the left so you won’t discuss it? Stay tuned in 2015 and your eyes will be opened.

        • December 24, 2014 at 6:15 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          You already “knew” I voted for Obama twice too and you were wrong as I didn’t even vote for him once. Maybe you should stop assuming you know me?

          “You just admitted that you won’t discuss whether the right is better than the left so you won’t discuss it?”

          Yes, I said I won’t discuss it ONLY BECAUSE IT’S OFF TOPIC. That’s the important part to remember.

          After all, how the hell is compromising on spending and reforming the tax code related to the tragic events of murdered children in Sandy Cook?

    • December 24, 2014 at 9:53 am
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      PS – Merry Christmas & Happy New Year to you — and anyone else who has stuck with our conversation and is still reading our posts — too!!



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*