Greenbeanie is correct. A loaded weapon - a bb gun?
How much pot? a joint, a pound? big difference.
Sounds like a stupid kid - he wasn't driving and the stuff was packed away in a backpack. Should be a simple ticket and confiscation, no charges. why ruin this kids life over trivialities. View Comment
OK, first kid - stupid, juvenile and what could be expected from a 13 year old.
He obviously thought he was being funny or witty and in retrospect, had he not posted it for all to see it would have been another in the long line of stupid things young males do or say. Charges filed? Great, now he has a juvenile record for essentially doing nothing other than being a stupid 13 year old.
The second one should be apologized to and the Police should be thankful if his parents don't file a freedom of speech suit. I like revolvers too, there I said it. Is this Nazi Germany, should I wait for a knock on the door now?
Common sense has been thrown away, kids can't make mistakes and if we happen to think or say something questionable, we are not given any slack.
So what these statistics tell us is that more people are driving safer yet there are a greater number of accidents.
Less speeders, less drunks and less hazardous movers, less deaths (1 instead of 2 which doesn't even fall into a statistical difference based on the number of drivers on the road.
So all the police vigilance does nothing to decrease traffic accidents.
These are your own stats. View Comment
This is really a tragedy but i am curious, if the damage is to the rear side behind the passenger door, wouldn't the cyclist have hit him? Per usual, the reporting is a little thin. Typically, if there is any damage, it would have been because the cyclist T-boned the car. Does that mean the car ran a light or stop sign?
Incredible. Sounds like someone didn't make their "payment". It took 3 years? and they snagged an incredible $3200.00 and a fully stocked kitchen.......
No drugs, guns, booze or bad conduct - just a roomful of tournament players.
Wow, it probably cost the city at least 20 times that with 29 officers on overtime plus all the diligent up front tough police work - 3 years?
to make this "significant bust". Keystone cops time or russian mafia.
Again, can you say missed payoff? Wonder if it was the cops or the landlord who was aggrieved?
Sorry, don't mean to sound cynical but you tell me another way to read this that makes sense....... View Comment
Nope, she was referring to a group of people, How can the 2nd amendment be a special interest? I think you could stand to go to school with your children. The special interest is the group of people who are trying to promote their "special interest",
an amendment is:
a·mend·ment [uh-mend-muhnt] Show IPA
the act of amending or the state of being amended.
an alteration of or addition to a motion, bill, constitution, etc.
See? Feel any smarter now or are you just as stupid as you were 5 minutes ago? View Comment
Norwalk, before you call anyone anything and call names that probably more aptly to you, all i ask is...show me. Show me that more have been stopped by a citizen with an assault rifle or a gun with a high capacity clip.
Show me. Show me that having a 30 round magazine has stopped a crime. If you want to go back to the time of the constitution, 1 round at a time in a long rifle. OK, done. Until you can show me, or better yet, show all of us. Be quiet and go back to your video games. View Comment
Are you as stupid as you appear? Democrats? Jobs? You can own a gun, you can buy a gun, you can carry a gun you just can't own buy nor carry one that fits into a narrow niche. Those guns manufactured in state may also be sold outside of CT. So you can't have a 30 round clip, ok, learn to shoot and get 3
9 round clips. So you can't buy a gun illegaly? Big deal, go to a gun store, go through the process and take home your equally as effective purchase.
What? Can't kill enough stuff with a legal gun? View Comment
Little Timmy, I applaud that you are actually thinking but unfortunatly, most of your points are flawed. The Government does not want to take away the poor rich peoples hard earned income. they are asking that the income be taxed in such a way as to promote a fair ride for all. Lets go back to Reagan or even better, Clinton. What was the tax rate then? OK, give up? Marginal Tax Rate on Regular Income: over $250,000: 39.6% - over $288,350: 39.6%
Maximum Tax Rate on Long-Term Capital Gains: 29.19% - 21.19%
And what happened during the Clinton years? Surplus, jobs, investment and innovation. So the capital gains were taxed at 5 to 14% higher - big deal. Did it make any difference in the lifestyles of the top earners? nope. Stop whining, pay taxes- nobody likes to but like going to the dentists regularly, it is a necessity or all your teeth fall out.
Thanks OSB. Exactly. Were we better off in 2008 than we were in 2000? Simple answer - no. You can't spend spend spend and not tax. Bush tried it and we are still feeling it. Its very simple economics, if you want to spend more money and not we more then you must make more. How does a Gov make more?
Simple, it taxes.
Why no-one can grasp this is beyond me.
Also, in times of economic hardship, it is the duty of the Government to find a way to help, public programs, infrastructure, etc..... are a necessity. Again, if people don't have jobs or money they can't buy stuff or go out and everybody suffers. Since the Bush era policies didn't create any jobs and just redistributed money to the top half another policy has to be put into effect. They (the big THEY) now have to pay for their massive fortunes, sorry, you might have to give back a few percent of your obscene profits. Boo freakin hooo.. View Comment
I agree but just so we get message right, Tax and Spend is a Republican talking point that means nothing. The way a government works is to tax - to raise money, and to spend that money on its people. Its not a bad thing, it is their function. Now spending it wisely, not on unwarranted foreign aggression, etc....
is another matter. Bush lied, people died - both Americans and Iraq citizens. View Comment
Sequestration: The term has been adapted by Congress in more recent years to describe a new fiscal policy procedure originally provided for in the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Deficit Reduction Act of 1985 -- an effort to reform Congressional voting procedures so as to make the size of the Federal government's budget deficit a matter of conscious choice.
Obama? he aint't the villain here, its your Republican controlled Congress that won't talk to anybody. Little children. View Comment