Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

alarmingrick wrote:Ah, I see. Just because he's on my insurance, "He lives with me"? Hey tool, ever stop to thing I took him because he was in too much
pain to drive himself. And that maybe he doesn't live with me? I wouldn't be happy if you didn't make assumptions. Any other gak you'd like to say
about my son, genius?

The only part of "that stupid freakin' horrid law" that has gone into effect is the requirement that insurance companies are required to allow children to remain on their parents' health insurance until (IIRC) 26. However, I'm pretty sure that it requires either your child is a student or that he lives with you full time.

Now, given that you drove him to the hospital, I made the assumption (grounded I think) that he isn't away at college, but rather living with you.

If your son really is living on his own and has his own insurance, and simply needed you to drive him to the hospital (and I'm pretty sure nothing in the Obamacare law changed your desire or need to drive him to the hospital), then good for him for being independent and good for you for being a good father. But then your comment that "it cost him $30 instead of over a hundred" has absolutely nothing to do with the law.

I never insulted your son. Any other personal insults you want to throw around?

biccat wrote:
The reason I ask is because it was literally the first line of the article, which should have alerted people that this was a satirical law.

Does this mean I should start assuming that all news articles lead with statements that are fully accurate, and not at all attempting to portray what they are covering in a dishonest light?

I guess Rick Santorum really did tell a sick child and his mother that they shouldn't complain about the exorbitant cost of medication compared to an iPad.

biccat wrote:But then your comment that "it cost him $30 instead of over a hundred" has absolutely nothing to do with the law.

The law reduced the prices, ergo, it has plenty to do with it.

biccat wrote:I never insulted your son.

Yes, you did insult his son.

biccat wrote:
Wow, your 21 year old son is still living with you? Maybe you should talk to him about becoming more independent.

This isn't necessarily insulting, but it is at least flippant.

He basically implied the guys' son was a loser.

biccat wrote:
Now, given that you drove him to the hospital, I made the assumption (grounded I think) that he isn't away at college, but rather living with you.

That's a poor assumption considering that many people go to colleges near to home, or live near their parents even if not at school.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:He basically implied the guys' son was a loser.

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.

dogma wrote:Does this mean I should start assuming that all news articles lead with statements that are fully accurate, and not at all attempting to portray what they are covering in a dishonest light?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're being flippant, rather than outright insulting.

Melissia wrote:

biccat wrote:But then your comment that "it cost him $30 instead of over a hundred" has absolutely nothing to do with the law.

The law reduced the prices, ergo, it has plenty to do with it.

So you can point to what parts of the law actually reduced prices?

biccat wrote:
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're being flippant, rather than outright insulting.

I imagine that were I to be outright insulting regarding your views or mannerisms, it would involve much more vulgarity.

dogma wrote:

biccat wrote:
Wow, your 21 year old son is still living with you? Maybe you should talk to him about becoming more independent.

This isn't necessarily insulting, but it is at least flippant.

I'd use the term "saucy."

Monster Rain wrote:

dogma wrote:

biccat wrote:
Wow, your 21 year old son is still living with you? Maybe you should talk to him about becoming more independent.

This isn't necessarily insulting, but it is at least flippant.

I'd use the term "saucy."

I use the term insulting. He made wild, wide accusations without knowing anything about the case, other than I drove my son there
and he's on my insurance. I used to find the strawman arguements entertaining, a little. Now I'm rolling biccathole free thanks to "ignore".
What a tool.

dogma wrote:

biccat wrote:
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're being flippant, rather than outright insulting.

I imagine that were I to be outright insulting regarding your views or mannerisms, it would involve much more vulgarity.

Unlikely, you've done so in the past without vulgarity.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

alarmingrick wrote:I use the term insulting. He made wild, wide accusations without knowing anything about the case, other than I drove my son there
and he's on my insurance. I used to find the strawman arguements entertaining, a little. Now I'm rolling biccathole free thanks to "ignore".
What a tool.

Yay, unintended offense is given and now you're unwilling to defend your deliberate misstatement of facts!

Another satisfied customer I suppose.

alarmingrick wrote:I use the term insulting. He made wild, wide accusations without knowing anything about the case

Which would temper my anger in this case, a bit. But you just keep on keeping on.

Ignoring only helps so much, I find. "Show Ignored Post" may as well be a giant red button labeled "Do Not Press."

biccat wrote:

alarmingrick wrote:I use the term insulting. He made wild, wide accusations without knowing anything about the case, other than I drove my son there
and he's on my insurance. I used to find the strawman arguements entertaining, a little. Now I'm rolling biccathole free thanks to "ignore".
What a tool.

Yay, unintended offense is given and now you're unwilling to defend your deliberate misstatement of facts!

Another satisfied customer I suppose.

My " deliberate misstatement of facts " would be? Please tell me, oh holier than thou.

edit:
And how's telling someone to tell their son to be more responsabile, without out knowing a damn thing about either,
not an insult?

alarmingrick: I made the same assumption also that it sounded like he lived with you, but thats more common these days anyway.

Melissa: "The law reduced the prices, "

I am glad someone is benefitting because my inurance went WAY up and its benefits went WAY down. I am afraid that it will only get worse.

Archaeo wrote:alarmingrick: I made the same assumption also that it sounded like he lived with you, but thats more common these days anyway.

Melissa: "The law reduced the prices, "

I am glad someone is benefitting because my inurance went WAY up and its benefits went WAY down. I am afraid that it will only get worse.

It probably will.
I've been with my company for 12 years. It's been that way from year 1. Your prices go up, or the coverage gets a little less.
Sometimes both has happened in the same cycle.
It's nice to be able to provide my son the ability to be treated, without him having to file bankruptcy if he needs surgery. And
also not chose whether he buys groceries this week or he gets to get his persciption filled.

Bi cat would of course know nothing about such things. RL is just something Fox tells him about.

SilverMK2 wrote:

I'd rather see bills that require all gun owners to regularly undergo training (and possibly re-evaluation as to their suitability for gun ownership).

Too bad this is in America, where we're allowed to have guns.

Go back to the UK where knives will be illegal soon.

Emerett wrote:

SilverMK2 wrote:

I'd rather see bills that require all gun owners to regularly undergo training (and possibly re-evaluation as to their suitability for gun ownership).

Too bad this is in America, where we're allowed to have guns.

Yah but if you buy a plane you have to take a pilots test to fly the thing. So why not undergo training to use something else you bought. Do you own a car? If the answer is yes then do you drive the car? If that answer is also yes you do know that you have to renew your license every now and then right?

Where's the right to planes and cars expressly mentioned in the Constitution?

And where is a Glock mentioned? All I am saying is you require refreshers in your training of those items why not a gun? I am not trying to say that all you gun bearers should not have them I am saying you should be reminded how to use them.

How those sayings go...?
"Gun Control is using both hands."
"Gun Control is hitting what you shoot at."

One of the problems with some "gun owners" is they are not trained in the care and usage of the weapons they have. Roughly, 18,000 gun injuries are listed as "accidental". Hard to have an "accident" with a properly maintained weapon.
Heck there is even a trope of "I didn't know the gun was loaded."

You want to Own a gun, learn the proper way to use and maintain it.

alarmingrick wrote:Biccat would of course know nothing about such things. RL is just something Fox tells him about.

You know, if I wanted to, I could misspell your name to try to be insulting. However, I'm above such things.

I do know about real life. In fact, I lost the health care coverage I used to like precisely because of this law. I had a high deductible plan that Mr. President decided I can't have anymore (the company eliminated that plan in light of the pending changes to the law). It was a good plan - it worked for me and my family.

So now I've been forced into a more expensive plan - that does have real life consequences for me - for the clearly expressed purpose of allowing your kid to stay on your insurance for another couple of years, rather than having to buy his own insurance.

The Health Insurance law ("Obamacare") doesn't reduce costs, it shifts them. Mostly from younger, poorer, workers (who now have to have their own plans) to older workers who will (assuming it ever happens, and I think it's unlikely) see a reduction in premiums.

But again, that doesn't address whether the law is constitutional or not. A discussion I expect you're not prepared to have, nor interested in having. Which is the point I raised in my original post, before noticing that you tried to call me out.

Next time you decide to call me out on something ("Sounds like a mandate, where's biccat"*), try engaging in the debate that you're trying to have, rather than throw in some personal sob story just so you can get righteously indignant.

Whether you ignore this post or not doesn't really concern me.

* paraphrasing, or quoting, I don't remember, nor do I care enough to go back and look

helgrenze wrote:How those sayings go...?
"Gun Control is using both hands."
"Gun Control is hitting what you shoot at."

One of the problems with some "gun owners" is they are not trained in the care and usage of the weapons they have. Roughly, 18,000 gun injuries are listed as "accidental". Hard to have an "accident" with a properly maintained weapon.
Heck there is even a trope of "I didn't know the gun was loaded."

You want to Own a gun, learn the proper way to use and maintain it.

Those arguments make me think of my Uncle, who I think is a complete dick hole. Hes the "family gun guy" according to him, and basically demanded he got my pawpaws police firearms (hes not even blood mind you) because he knows how to handle weapons properly. Funny thing is, he shot himself in the upper thigh, nearly severing his penis, while cleaning a revolver, and used that excuse. Go ahead and think about what I just said for a moment......................get it yet? yea, he thought a REVOLVER was unloaded and nearly shot his dick off. At least it makes me chuckle when I think of my Uncle.

biccat wrote:
Unlikely, you've done so in the past without vulgarity.

I did?

I suppose its in the eye of the beholder, but then not really, because insults are primarily issues of social consideration.

Calling someone a fascist doesn't really have much in the way of derogatory meaning if "fascist" isn't a term that many people find insulting.

Alternatively, suggesting that someone's child should be more independent, in the United States, is often viewed as insulting. Either you didn't know that, or you did, and you intended to insult a particular person.

Now, before you attempt to draw a parallel, satire is not implicitly insulting; nor is mockery, if you want to go that way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

biccat wrote:
So now I've been forced into a more expensive plan - that does have real life consequences for me - for the clearly expressed purpose of allowing your kid to stay on your insurance for another couple of years, rather than having to buy his own insurance.

Why should he care more about your kids than his?

biccat wrote:snip*

You seem to have missed this:

My " deliberate misstatement of facts " would be? Please tell me, oh holier than thou.

edit:
And how's telling someone to tell their son to be more responsabile, without out knowing a damn thing about either,
not an insult?

alarmingrick wrote:My " deliberate misstatement of facts " would be? Please tell me, oh holier than thou.

That would be the statement that the Health Care law had anything to do with your son saving money.

alarmingrick wrote:And how's telling someone to tell their son to be more responsabile, without out knowing a damn thing about either, not an insult?

Well, I don't think it's insulting. So the mens rea requirement isn't satisfied. You could tell me my daughter should be more responsible, and I'd laugh at the comment, not find it offensive.

Perhaps I touched a nerve?

dogma wrote:Why should he care more about your kids than his?

I don't expect him to. However, I take offense to rent seekers, particularly when it's at my expense.

KingCracker wrote: Funny thing is, he shot himself in the upper thigh, nearly severing his penis, while cleaning a revolver, and used that excuse. Go ahead and think about what I just said for a moment......................get it yet? yea, he thought a REVOLVER was unloaded and nearly shot his dick off. At least it makes me chuckle when I think of my Uncle.

Hahahahahaha. I'm a Brit and this is funny! Just because I don't own a gun or believe in having one doesn't mean I don't know how to use one. Your uncle is a MORON.

For those other Brits that might not get this...

0. Never point a gun at something you don't want to hit.
1. Never leave an unattended weapon loaded.
2. Even if you know it isn't loaded check the magazine and breach when it is handed over or picked up.
3. You can see the frickin rounds in a revolver and you are supposed to open it before you clean it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Emerett wrote:

SilverMK2 wrote:

I'd rather see bills that require all gun owners to regularly undergo training (and possibly re-evaluation as to their suitability for gun ownership).

Too bad this is in America, where we're allowed to have guns.

Go back to the UK where knives will be illegal soon.

It is already illegal to carry knives over 2 inches long without an "Occupational Reason" foor it.

Normally I couldn't carry any more than a pen knife but when I am out and about doing re-enactments I get to carry a broadsword. It is all about context here. If you have a knife as a threat or potential threat to another person it is illegal; if on the other hand you are out fishing you can have a large blade (you will have to have the rods with you).

It's the same with guns. You can't have a hand gun or automatic weapon because no-one could come up with a good reason for them other than killing people. Shotguns and rifles are legal for hunting, farming and target shooting.

This is interesting because the guns used in the 2012 olympics are classified as illegal hand guns under British law.

biccat wrote:Well, I don't think it's insulting.

I don't think calling republicans "Repugs" is insulting but I still got a mod asking me to stop.

Melissia wrote:

biccat wrote:Well, I don't think it's insulting.

I don't think calling republicans "Repugs" is insulting but I still got a mod asking me to stop.

It is. Its like calling Democrats Demorats.

Frazzled wrote:

Melissia wrote:

biccat wrote:Well, I don't think it's insulting.

I don't think calling republicans "Repugs" is insulting but I still got a mod asking me to stop.

It is. Its like calling Democrats Demonrats.

True, but Democrats get offended if you refer to their party as the "Democrat Party."

If a mod wants me to stop calling people who don't buy their own insurance "irresponsible," I will refrain from doing so. If they want me to stop calling "daschunds" "weiner dogs" I can do that too.

biccat wrote: If they want me to stop calling "daschunds" "weiner dogs" I can do that too.

Tbone the Yoda of wiener dogs says the term "weiner" is all part of their nefarious scheme. No one expects Dachshundskrieg from a bunch of "wieners."




Automatically Appended Next Post:

alarmingrick wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

dogma wrote:

biccat wrote:
Wow, your 21 year old son is still living with you? Maybe you should talk to him about becoming more independent.

This isn't necessarily insulting, but it is at least flippant.

I'd use the term "saucy."

I use the term insulting. He made wild, wide accusations without knowing anything about the case, other than I drove my son there
and he's on my insurance. I used to find the strawman arguements entertaining, a little. Now I'm rolling biccathole free thanks to "ignore".
What a tool.

Twenty one? Mine's 17 and already eats me out of house and home. She Who Must Be Obeyed has queried my desire to install a time locked Sweeney Todd style ejection system and slide under his bed set for his 18th birthday. Its just a motivational tool...