Originally posted by Tzeentch._
Who cares? Most people who lose their loved ones don't get shit for their trouble. My sister sure didn't. And while I'm sure money wouldn't have consoled her 12 years ago when her mom kicked the bucket, she's 26 now and can't pay her rent; it would have been nice if someone had given her a check for 10 milliin bucks on her 18th birthday, which is what's costs gonna happen to this cat if that lawyer wins this case.Money doesn't buy happiness but it makes hell a lot easier to live in.
Why does the government have to pay? And if it does, how exactly will it make schools safer? If anything it will just force them to make more cuts to what are probably already tiny security budgets.
Did you actually give thought to any of this, or are you just being a DDD-esque contrarian?
Originally posted by Omega VisionLife isn't fair, and it doesn't care about your moral platitudes, so quit the whiny bitching. lol
So what, $100 million for each surviving student? Why that much? You're talking about living comfortably and paying rent, but no one needs even a tenth of that to live comfortably and pay rent.Why does the government have to pay? And if it does, how exactly will it make schools safer? If anything it will just force them to make more cuts to what are probably already tiny security budgets.
Did you actually give thought to any of this, or are you just being a DDD-esque contrarian?
I'm not sure why you're trying to apply an appeal-to-equality to a situation that, by its very nature, is not equal. Is it fair that one kid out of however many survivors might be getting a lot of money as compensation for the trauma he's received? No. But then again, 4th graders getting mowed down by a madman with a semi-automatic isn't fair either. Is it fair that the government should have to shell out a hundred million to some greasy lawyer and a traumatized kid? No. But then again, it isn't fair that the Government will happily throw 211 million dollars on a single ****ing F-22, yet 6 million kids die of starvation every year.
The question isn't whether "it's fair", the question is if it's something worth being outraged about. Considering all the retarded bullshit this country wastes its money on on a regular basis, being upset because "o noes some traumatized kid is going to get millions of dollars =( " is stupid and naive.
Let me know when the government shifts 75% of the money it spends on "defense" toward something useful like free healthcare, or better student aid so that anyone can afford to go to college. Then I'll be upset by the notion of a 6 year old who nearly got his head blown off receiving 50 million dollars.
Originally posted by Tzeentch._
Life isn't fair, and it doesn't care about your moral platitudes, so quit the whiny bitching. lolI'm not sure why you're trying to apply an appeal-to-equality to a situation that, by its very nature, is not equal. Is it fair that one kid out of however many survivors might be getting a lot of money as compensation for the trauma he's received? No. But then again, 4th graders getting mowed down by a madman with a semi-automatic isn't fair either. Is it fair that the government should have to shell out a hundred million to some greasy lawyer and a traumatized kid? No. But then again, it isn't fair that the Government will happily throw 211 million dollars on a single ****ing F-22, yet 6 million kids die of starvation every year.
The question isn't whether "it's fair", the question is if it's something worth being outraged about. Considering all the retarded bullshit this country wastes its money on on a regular basis, being upset because "o noes some traumatized kid is going to get millions of dollars =( " is stupid and naive.
Let me know when the government shifts 75% of the money it spends on "defense" toward something useful like free healthcare, or better student aid so that anyone can afford to go to college. Then I'll be upset by the notion of a 6 year old who nearly got his head blown off receiving 50 million dollars.
This "there's injustice in the world so you shouldn't get upset over injustice" is one of most useless worldviews you could adopt. "So what some elementary kids got shot? Ten times that many die every day in an average African country." See where this leads?
The outrage is about the crassness of the suit as response to a tragedy, and the baselessness of the claim that this suit will somehow improve security.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
[B]I never used the word "fair". You did. You're completely missing the point. I don't think it's about the kid being traumatized. It's not about him getting money, it's about him being used. When you almost get shot, I doubt the first thing that comes to mind is "damn, I need someone I don't know to give me $100 million for emotional damages." I don't believe for a second that the kid is behind the suit, he's just a patsy who probably won't even receive much money once the legal fees are paid (no way they'll win the $100 million, it will be a settlement for a tenth or less, if anything), for all the good it will do if he really is traumatized.
I think this will be the third time I've stated this, but, third time is the charm so aright. Why does it matter if the kid is being used? He's getting set for life anyway.
This "there's injustice in the world so you shouldn't get upset over injustice"Except that's not what I said. What I said is that I'm not going to lose sleep over a kid getting millions when billions are wasted on bullshit every day. In fact, I feel a modicum of contentment to know that of those billions, .001% of it is at least going toward something that is going to actually benefit someone down the road.
The outrage is about the crassness of the suit as response to a tragedy, and the baselessness of the claim that this suit will somehow improve security.Cool. You must have a large capacity for outrage though, considering that on the scale of things to be outraged about. this rates pretty damn low.
there is sort of a terrible precedence to being able to sue the state for the actions of a crazed gunman...
short of an all out police state, how would the level of protection being necessitated by the suit be established? Its like saying the state is responsible for ensuring there is no such thing as a soft target in the entire geographic area.
Originally posted by Oliver NorthIt's all dem guvment's fault. If they don't want us taking all their money, then maybe they should start doing the sensible thing and arming every child in America and placing them in Marine-protected schools.
there is sort of a terrible precedence to being able to sue the state for the actions of a crazed gunman...short of an all out police state, how would the level of protection being necessitated by the suit be established? Its like saying the state is responsible for ensuring there is no such thing as a soft target in the entire geographic area.
Stoopid guvment.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/01/kindergartner-suspended-over-bubble-gun-threat/
Gun control, making the world safer one school at a time. 313
Originally posted by Tzeentch._
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/05/colorado-boy-7-out-to-ave-world-reportedly-faces-suspension-for-imaginary/http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/01/kindergartner-suspended-over-bubble-gun-threat/
Gun control, making the world safer one school at a time. 313
I hope to Zeus there was a fat, balding cop on the scene to taser the shit out of that five-year-old.
Originally posted by Tzeentch._
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/05/colorado-boy-7-out-to-ave-world-reportedly-faces-suspension-for-imaginary/
Kid looks like an *******.