Favorite team:LSU 
Location:
Biography:
Interests:
Occupation:
Number of Posts:10133
Registered on:7/10/2009
Online Status:Not Online

Recent Posts

Message
Just say you can’t afford it, no need to try to justify your broke arse
I can disagree with open carry being illegal while still recognizing that it is the law as it stands in FL.
You may be handicapped so I’ll try to explain further. I don’t think most in this thread have said anything about it being justified. However, it is illegal to open carry in FL. Do you live in FL? Do you conceal carry? Are you purposely speaking in hyperbole and being a retard?

Most rational adults understand there are consequences to actions, including breaking the law. I’m still waiting for all these OIS cases where people were shot while holding their “dove” gun.

I also acknowledge that there have been plenty of OIS that were unjustified, and that needs to be corrected. Logic shows you can believe both to be true.
Whether the shooting was justified needs to be determined. However, it is illegal to open carry in FL whether you agree or disagree and he doesn’t get killed if he doesn’t break that simple law. You are so jaded you want to act like all these things are mutually exclusive
For one, it’s illegal to open carry in Florida. Carrying a rifle on a busy street in tactical gear and a plate carrier is in no way the same as bringing your gun to the truck.

fricking nonsense
quote:

you are toting your dove gun from the house to the truck and cop happens by and tells you to drop that nice O/U your dad left you and you hesitate you have to die...'cause you did not comply.


Why be intellectually dishonest to try to make some bullshite strawman for this instance?

re: Tampa Police Shoot and Kill Army Vet

Posted by DCtiger1 on 4/24/25 at 12:53 pm
No open carry in FL, can’t brandish a weapon in public unless hunting or fishing
quote:

The only way I actually get any benefit from spending that money is if I die


How do you get any benefit if you’re dead? Oh, your wife and family gets the benefit you say? That’s the entire point. Term is max coverage at a low price. The intend is to cover your working years and potential lost income if you pass away.

Explain how it’s not more of a gamble to have no coverage because you think you don’t need it? Don’t worry, I’m sure your wife’s boyfriend will set up a go fund me for you.
Give some examples, specifically related to life insurance.
quote:

When I buy a term life policy (let's say a 20 year policy) I'm putting down money on a bet and the only way I win that bet is if I die.


Most of this board can’t even realize how idiotic this statement is.

re: Men vs women corporate observation

Posted by DCtiger1 on 4/23/25 at 4:11 pm
False, you’re clearly not familiar with Douche Tacs shtick

re: Men vs women corporate observation

Posted by DCtiger1 on 4/23/25 at 3:47 pm
quote:

Wow! There are a ton of morons that can't read the original message. He said he FINISHED the presentation and stood in the back and made these observations. I think I see the problem now


White knighting for the compulsive liar of the OT is a bad look.

re: Men vs women corporate observation

Posted by DCtiger1 on 4/23/25 at 3:46 pm
Sounds like your role is non-critical and no one gave a shite
quote:

Insurance companies are touting record Wall Street profits,


This is pandering bullshite. Half the large insurers aren’t even stock companies.
quote:

Yeah, this isn't like CA or TX wherein the population alone could force the insurance company to negotiate down. If you are State Farm, would you pull out of one or both and keep yourself from 50 million+ potential customers


This isn’t reality though. Cali is a perfect example. Why are so many companies pulling out? Because they have stupid laws and idiot insurance commissioners that suppressed rates and denied necessary increases at the request of consumer watch dog NPOs.

Pacific pallisades had some of the cheapest rates in the nation for HO policies. Rate is matched to exposure and planning for catastrophes is a crap shoot. If companies cannot charge the proper rate to match risk, they will simply choose to not do business in that state. SF isn’t going to bankrupt mutual company over CA. They would simply stop writing fire under SF general, continue to write auto and if the situation improved they could re-enter the market.

BTW, the Cali insurance commissioner essentially wants SF to subsidize Cali rates amongst the entire nation instead of approving rate for just CA.
quote:

I’d rather be retarded than an insurance salesman.


Cool, I’d rather make money and have freedom.