DaVinci

Great.... So do you support an ID to vote, or not needing an ID to buy a gun?

No, it smacks of wanting each legal vote to be cast but only legal votes to be cast. The opposite of your comment would be, "Not wanting voter relations smacks of wanting to allow illegals to vote". While there might be some on both sides of the debate that think those ways.... You are trying to claim that it is the reason. Conservatives that want voter ID do not back a National ID.

JUST as valid as yours that it is not a problem.

Nope, I don't disagree with that at all.But you said, "with no questions ask" [SIC]. And that is pure crap.

I already have extra coats. No additional cost. Simple... One you do not have to act and you do not get the discount. The other you HAVE to act or pay a penalty. You walk into the car lot... I tell you that if you buy today I will give you a discount. VS, you decide to NOT buy a car and the govt decides to increase your taxes. Only if things are adjusted. And just because at the bottom line it may be balanced, that does not make it "fair" If I make you buy all my jump tickets, then yes the DZ still gets the ticket money, but that does not mean it was the right thing to do.... Even if you could more easily afford the extra cost. Now, if you CHOOSE to pay the extra cost... good on you. But you don't have the right to decide that Bob should have to pay the extra cost.

Zimmerman said he broke contact when the dispatcher told him, "You do not need to do that". Zimmerman then claims Martin approached him. Martin's group claims Zimmerman still hunted Martin. So you KNOW that Zimmerman "pursued a teenager against 911 advice"???? Or are you assuming that?

Then requiring an ID to buy a gun when the Id is not free is a violation of the 2nd.

Sure, but I never claimed Martin "went out looking for trouble" like Kallend did.

I guess you forgot that Zimmerman was not "on duty" when he saw Martin.... So he did not "go out looking for trouble"... He went out to get groceries.

No, I have the option to open my windows in the summer and put on more clothes in the winter. And that is a persons right to CHOOSE what to do. It is not like if I don't buy a new air conditioner the Govt will FINE me. Discount to reward behavior vs penalty to reward behavior... That is the difference.

You think Romney is "Hard right wing"????? What ever gave you that idea? Was it is Health care plan? His banning of guns? If that is your idea of "Hard right wing".... Now I see part of the problem. At this point in Carter v Reagan Carter had a 9 point lead. Exactly what group that voted for McCain last time is suddenly thinking that they should instead vote for Obama? The college kids who are now out of school without a job?

What I love s how you just made that up. All I ever said is you should have to be a citizen to vote and asking for you to prove that is not asking much.... I mean you seem to be fine with me having to show ID to buy a gun, why should that SAME standard not apply to voting? And unless you have data to show how many illegal votes have been cast... you are tailing out of your ass when you claim it is not many.... Fact is you can't prove that.

Total crap comment with nothing to back it up.

They make up crap like this.

You can claim that, but that does not make it true. FAIL. One is OPTIONAL. I can decide if I WANT to buy a new air conditioner. I have the option to do nothing. The other is MANDATORY, I either do A or I have to do B. One is a reward I can choose to take or not. The other is a penalty that I would HAVE to pay. Simply put it is about MAKING you do something vs. giving you the option.

Try reading it again. I never said he didn't go out looking for trouble, I said one went out into a known situation VS coming across one. One went out to engage, one went out to investigate. Definitions are important, paying attention to detail is as well.

We know he left his truck to follow the guy. He states that himself. We also know he said he turned around when the dispatcher told him that it was not needed. We do know that Martin's GF said he turned around and started a discussion with Zimmerman: "DeeDee said Martin turned around and asked Zimmerman why he was following him. "The man said what are you doing around here?" DeeDee recalled". We also know that Martin never called the police and Zimmerman DID. Another major difference between the two cases.

Your argument is silly. If you don't buy a new AC you do not get a break. If you do not buy HC, you get a bill. That the best you can do? Didn't we already discuss how attacking the person is the lowest form of debate?

And yet there are STILL people on the rolls that are not legally on there... Such as people that died years ago. You may not like the process, but it is the only process that at least in theory is allowed by Federal Law. Federal Laws says that the States have to make sure that the voter rolls are correct. There are very few options to do that other than to question those that are questionable.... To not require them to prove they are legal and do nothing if they do not... then there is very little other avenues to take. Might be better to just answer the letter they sent to your home of record, or just cast a provisional ballot. And I STRONGLY object to a illegal voter casting a ballot for any reason. Why not just ask for Id at the polling location? And if you allow an illegal vote to be cast, you have violated one of my most basic rights... to have my vote carry the weight it is supposed to have and not be watered down by an illegal vote. You have no data to support your claim. How many illegal votes were cast in the last Presidential election? If you do not have that number, then it is impossible to claim you know how big the problem is.

Your reply shows it is a debate. Anyone who believes anything anyone says without checking independently is an idiot.... Difference is I include people like Obama along with Scott.

Just because it might happen, does not mean it is a smart move. I predict in the next 12 years the US will take military action against another Country.... Just because it might happen, does not mean it will be a good idea.

If you think... But in one case a guy picked up a gun and went into a KNOWN situation. The other is a guy that had a gun and came across a situation. One a guy was just a homeowner, the other he was the neighborhood watch captain. One the guy went to engage, the other he went to investigate. One case the guy started the confrontation, the other he claims he was just observing and then LEFT the area and was attacked. Vastly different situations.

The govt does not MAKE you buy those things. It does not send the IRS after you if you do not upgrade. Stop being intentionally obtuse. Unless you can show me where the Govt is going to MAKE you upgrade your AC unit or send the IRS after you.... Your argument is total bullshit.

No, it is because some people still try to disassociate themselves to start trouble. 236 years ago "Happy White Peoples Day" would have been a true statement, today it is not. December 6, 1865, July 9, 1868, and February 3, 1870 were intended to include everyone and that comment, legally, became null and void. A lot of people then and now are fucked up. Still does not change that they created a system of govt that has lasted longer than most of the govts on this planet and helped create one of the most powerful nations ever seen.

In the 70's fuel injection didn't make a lot of sense. It was expensive. In the 90's they WERE a waste of money. Hell as of 2005 it took 7 years to break even given the added cost of the hybrid vs buying the gas powered equivalent. In the 90's the batteries DIDN'T work, they were heavy, expensive, didn't hold a charge very long, and developed memory. Yes, amazing what 20 years of technological advances can do. And in the 90's they WERE wastes of time. Soledra ring a bell? That was then, this is now. Progress can be good..... Early adoption of unproven technologies is not always the smart move. That being said, I am ALL for individuals risking their own money to try and make a better mouse trap. There was no way I would have bough a hybrid in 1990, and I didn't want to buy one in 00. Now 10 years later, my next car *might* be a hybrid.