User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/15/2016 9:09:59 PM EDT
[#1]
If a lawyer is for the "Medical pot" then there has to be some way he is profiting from his "Compassion" VOTE NO TO DRUGS!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/15/2016 11:39:40 PM EDT
[#2]
Vote no on 2. 2 is for pot. I think its a load of horse shit! Cancer patients have had access to THC pills for 20yrs. A cancer pt or some fuckface 20yr old with "anxiety" dosent need to be buying pot with my tax money!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 1:32:33 AM EDT
[#3]
Vote NO for Amendment 1: Solar energy amendment, it's a misleading amendment sponsored by the utilities companies. It's the tipical bait and switch game played in politics where they tell you they're passing a law to benefit you but load it up with extras to f%$# you up. Solar systems are already protected, there's no need for an amendment to protect them.
This is coming from someone who just got a solar system with 43 solar panels installed last month. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 7:01:36 AM EDT
[#4]
I don't believe constitutional amendments are something to take lightly. I view them as a way to circumvent the process required to change or create laws. This is how we end up with a "living" constitution that many believe need to change with the times. I disagree. A constitution is a foundation and should not be changed. Work within the confines set by the constitution and try again. I won't vote for any amendment.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 9:29:18 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't believe constitutional amendments are something to take lightly. I view them as a way to circumvent the process required to change or create laws. This is how we end up with a "living" constitution that many believe need to change with the times. I disagree. A constitution is a foundation and should not be changed. Work within the confines set by the constitution and try again. I won't vote for any amendment. What, you don't think rules about the size of pens that pigs should be kept in is worthy of inclusion in our foundational document? How dare you? Porkist! Pork lives matter! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 9:55:37 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't believe constitutional amendments are something to take lightly. I view them as a way to circumvent the process required to change or create laws. This is how we end up with a "living" constitution that many believe need to change with the times. I disagree. A constitution is a foundation and should not be changed. Work within the confines set by the constitution and try again. I won't vote for any amendment. I might be speaking out of my ass here, but isn't there a flip side to that? Something along the lines of voters changing something because committees or legislature is playing games with the process? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 11:01:36 AM EDT
[#7]
Vote No on amendment 1, it's a slickly worded bunch of bullshit that leaves you without an alternative to the utility companies.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 2:34:32 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Vote No on amendment 1, it's a slickly worded bunch of bullshit that leaves you without an alternative to the utility companies. And the other Solar Amendment already passed, this one is purposely vague and missleading. http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/times-recommends-vote-no-on-anti-solar-amendment-1/2298106 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/16/2016 3:54:16 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't believe constitutional amendments are something to take lightly. I view them as a way to circumvent the process required to change or create laws. This is how we end up with a "living" constitution that many believe need to change with the times. I disagree. A constitution is a foundation and should not be changed. Work within the confines set by the constitution and try again. I won't vote for any amendment. I agree. As I understand it, our government was established as having NO POWERS except those that are GRANTED TO IT BY THE PEOPLE through the constitution / amendment process. Therefore ALL amendments exist solely for the purpose of granting additional powers to the government (or rescinding a previous amendment). When our government is on an out-of-control power-grabbing trip like it is now, they will get no help from me. Unless the amendment in question is to rescind a previous poorly worded amendment, or to force compliance with the bill of rights, I automatically default to "NO". We need to focus on making our legislative representatives do the job they were elected to do. The only amendment I would support right now would be term limits! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2016 2:03:25 PM EDT
[#10]
My thought is that these things should alway be voted "NO" unless they're well-understood. The pig pen one was to set a precedent for the group to attack other states as Florida only had a couple small hog farms as best as I remember (and they both closed up shop due to the amendment).
I did vote yes on the judicial review of amendments prior to placing them on the ballot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2016 7:49:44 PM EDT
[#11]
This is a personal thing, but I vote against any of the amendments. So many of the proposals should be handled legislatively and not be a permanent part of the state Constitution.
Again, this is my OPINION so take it for what it's worth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/19/2016 8:09:35 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If a lawyer is for the "Medical pot" then there has to be some way he is profiting from his "Compassion" VOTE NO TO DRUGS! It's my understanding that the lawyer pushing this one has already set in place the growing, transporting, and distribution network needed. Go figure. Earlier this year when I drove to PA I heard his commercials all the way to the Carolina's. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/21/2016 6:38:20 PM EDT
[#13]
Ask yourself does this belong in our state constitution.
Most of them have no place as a constitutional amendment. That is why we now have a super majority to amend the constitution. Net fishing ban, pregnant pig amendments are just some of the trash put in our constitution. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 3:30:51 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't believe constitutional amendments are something to take lightly. I view them as a way to circumvent the process required to change or create laws. This is how we end up with a "living" constitution that many believe need to change with the times. I disagree. A constitution is a foundation and should not be changed. Work within the confines set by the constitution and try again. I won't vote for any amendment. Also, if our elected people followed the constituions, we wouldn't be in this messy situation. Take marijuana for instance. No man has the right to tell another what he can or cannot eat, smoke, snort, or shove up his ass. Yet that is exactly what happens when they regulate chemistry and criminalize *certain* drugs, but not others. It get so messy with taxes. Taxes to regulate (should not exist). Sales taxes (should not exist). Taxes to register (should be open to all). Personally, I view amendment 2 as a stepping stone to decriminalization of all narcotic substances. The fact that some douchebag lawyer might make a killing by temporarily cornering the market legislatively is unfortunate, but that is the short game. The long game is public acceptance of freedom. The medical-only class moves us closer to more freedom. When it becomes open to all, the tax issue is solved. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 3:50:51 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's my understanding that the lawyer pushing this one has already set in place the growing, transporting, and distribution network needed. Go figure. Earlier this year when I drove to PA I heard his commercials all the way to the Carolina's. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: If a lawyer is for the "Medical pot" then there has to be some way he is profiting from his "Compassion" VOTE NO TO DRUGS! It's my understanding that the lawyer pushing this one has already set in place the growing, transporting, and distribution network needed. Go figure. Earlier this year when I drove to PA I heard his commercials all the way to the Carolina's. Morgan and morgan..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 5:45:55 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My thought is that these things should alway be voted "NO" unless they're well-understood. The pig pen one was to set a precedent for the group to attack other states as Florida only had a couple small hog farms as best as I remember (and they both closed up shop due to the amendment). I did vote yes on the judicial review of amendments prior to placing them on the ballot. My view as well. It would have to be a really BIG deal to get me to vote for an amendment. Pig cage sizes? Yup, welcome to the age of the enlightened voter.....we as humans are so smart nowadays! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 8:13:58 PM EDT
[#17]
NO
to any amendment to the state constitution! Make the legislators support their voters, or not - if its a BS bill or law. Then, let the voters decide next. There's already a process we have to pass laws, and the "medial marijuana train" knows this, so they're trying an end-run, via making/expanding medical-pot a constitutional right 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/24/2016 9:33:31 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't believe constitutional amendments are something to take lightly. I view them as a way to circumvent the process required to change or create laws. This is how we end up with a "living" constitution that many believe need to change with the times. I disagree. A constitution is a foundation and should not be changed. Work within the confines set by the constitution and try again. I won't vote for any amendment. Finally someone who sees things the way I do.. I routinely vote no on all amendments. Most of the amendments are things that, like you said, can be enacted through legislation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 7:14:06 AM EDT
[#19]
I voted NO on 1 and 2. I had never heard of #3 (my fault) but it sounded reasonable so I voted for it. I had never heard of #4 either so I voted No on it since I had voted YES on #3.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 8:42:14 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I voted NO on 1 and 2. I had never heard of #3 (my fault) but it sounded reasonable so I voted for it. I had never heard of #4 either so I voted No on it since I had voted YES on #3. No 3 is another disaster due to excessive taxation. On the one hand, nobody should pay ad valorem taxes, because they shouldn't exist. On the other hand, if the People exempt one group from the taxation, it will help them move towards exempting everyone. Total and permanent disability financial hardship is solved by purchasing private supplemental disability insurance in the same way life insurance is purchased- individually. Private individual insurance on top of employer sponsored plans will provide 90%+ of income due to injury, usually until 65. This would certainly cover ad valorem taxes. The downside to voting yes to #3 is that taking the argument to its logical conclusion means that every person who gets a special exemption transfers the burden of taxation to the ones who still pay. Long term its a dangerous strategy because up until all ad valorem taxes are smashed for everyone, fewer people are supporting everyone else. Usually the higher earners which means less capital for investment, jobs, growth, and prosperity. So it's a mess.  I went with nay since I already pay for additional disability insurance- why don't they?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 9:54:57 AM EDT
[#21]
^^ Excellent points. I F'ed up and should have voted no on all 4 amendments. Thanks for the explanation.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 2:31:41 PM EDT
[#22]
Technically speaking, #2 is already legal in Florida. The Compassionate Medical Cannabis Act was passed in 2014. A person has to qualify and it's tightly regulated, but it is legal.
Lots of people don't want the general public to know that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 6:51:06 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Vote NO for Amendment 1: Solar energy amendment, it's a misleading amendment sponsored by the utilities companies. It's the tipical bait and switch game played in politics where they tell you they're passing a law to benefit you but load it up with extras to f%$# you up. Solar systems are already protected, there's no need for an amendment to protect them. This is coming from someone who just got a solar system with 43 solar panels installed last month. Been seeing ads in support of Amend 1 on the socialist Bay News 9 and NBC News commercials. They make it sound like the best thing since sliced bread (not a fan of either news - the enemy actually). Even if something is great, generally, I'm still super hesitant to vote "Yes" to any amendment...NO NO NO! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/25/2016 8:07:07 PM EDT
[#24]
Just saw tv commercial on Admendment 1 and they mentioned that Firefighters support it......BULLS@@t we do not not support Admendment 1 that's a lie. I have not spoke to one Firefighter that supports that B.S. maybe the Union does but we do not vote with the Union anyways. Number one what the heck does firefighters care about solar energy and the power company making money. As a matter of fact there are quite a few firefighter preppers that have solar or are interested in it.
As a matter of fact as far as the Union goes....I won't go there. Does the union do good things yes. But they do not vote for us they need to stop endorsing bills and people that the firefighter do not as a whole. 80% do not support Hillary or the Democrats even though the union may say firefighter do. Another lie. I'm retired now so I can say this. Admendment 3 I did vote for homestead exemption for first responders permanently disabled in the line of duty. Not hurt, but permanently and totally disabled while preforming their job and injuried and disabled 100% in the line of duty. It's a credit on property taxes. They do it for 100 % disabled veterans also. That's firefighter, EMS, LEOs all first responders. Vote yes. I've seen those guys die while trying to save lifes of their fellow citizens. When they can't save them it really impacts them emotionally. I can remember every person I could not save. I was a paramedic also. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 6:41:37 AM EDT
[#25]
For the hive in the following counties:
Charlotte, Collier, DeSoto, Glades, Hardee, Hendry, Highlands, Hillsborough, Lee, Manatee, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, Sarasota (Judicial Circuits: 6th, 10th, 12th, 13th and 20th) On the ballot, the following 3 Florida Supreme Court Justices are clearly supporters of the 2A: Hon. Charles T Canady, a truly brilliant judge Hon. Ricky L. Polston Hon. Jorge Labarga Vote "YES" for their retention. Also vote "YES" to retain ALL Judges in the SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL . While no Second Amendment info is available on them individually, they are collectively a fairly conservative bench whose decisions appear to support the 2A. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 9:00:30 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Morgan and morgan..... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If a lawyer is for the "Medical pot" then there has to be some way he is profiting from his "Compassion" VOTE NO TO DRUGS! It's my understanding that the lawyer pushing this one has already set in place the growing, transporting, and distribution network needed. Go figure. Earlier this year when I drove to PA I heard his commercials all the way to the Carolina's. Morgan and morgan..... +1 lowlife opportunists |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 10:52:56 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For the hive in the following counties: Charlotte, Collier, DeSoto, Glades, Hardee, Hendry, Highlands, Hillsborough, Lee, Manatee, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, Sarasota (Judicial Circuits: 6th, 10th, 12th, 13th and 20th) On the ballot, the following 3 Florida Supreme Court Justices are clearly supporters of the 2A: Hon. Charles T Canady, a truly brilliant judge Hon. Ricky L. Polston Hon. Jorge Labarga Vote "YES" for their retention. Also vote "YES" to retain ALL Judges in the SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL . While no Second Amendment info is available on them individually, they are collectively a fairly conservative bench whose decisions appear to support the 2A. "I don't think journalists' camera kill people." Labarga said http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/florida/fl-supreme-court-open-carry-20160608-story.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 12:28:34 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"I don't think journalists' camera kill people." Labarga said http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/florida/fl-supreme-court-open-carry-20160608-story.html Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
For the hive in the following counties: Charlotte, Collier, DeSoto, Glades, Hardee, Hendry, Highlands, Hillsborough, Lee, Manatee, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, Sarasota (Judicial Circuits: 6th, 10th, 12th, 13th and 20th) On the ballot, the following 3 Florida Supreme Court Justices are clearly supporters of the 2A: Hon. Charles T Canady, a truly brilliant judge Hon. Ricky L. Polston Hon. Jorge Labarga Vote "YES" for their retention. Also vote "YES" to retain ALL Judges in the SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL . While no Second Amendment info is available on them individually, they are collectively a fairly conservative bench whose decisions appear to support the 2A. "I don't think journalists' camera kill people." Labarga said http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/florida/fl-supreme-court-open-carry-20160608-story.html Thanks for this link! I will be casting a big fat NO for Hon. Jorge Labarga ...NO. NOPE! eta - Hon. Jorge Labarga's response should have bee "journalists' cameras don't kill people and neither do guns...people kill people" |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/26/2016 10:25:14 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Technically speaking, #2 is already legal in Florida. The Compassionate Medical Cannabis Act was passed in 2014. A person has to qualify and it's tightly regulated, but it is legal. Lots of people don't want the general public to know that. They also dont want people to know cancer patients have had access to thc pills for 20yrs. This is just some bullshit to make smoking a joint for any asshole that says "i have anxiety" legal. As a first responder I support the tax amendment for those of use that become disabled while protecting the community. If you have strong feelings about that then perhaps you are not thinking about how much risk we take on to serve that those in the private sector dont. Great risk comes great reward. Its not for that poor bastard that gets disabled anyways, its to help ease the financial burden so they can feed thier kids on thier new reduced income. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/27/2016 8:49:30 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They also dont want people to know cancer patients have had access to thc pills for 20yrs. This is just some bullshit to make smoking a joint for any asshole that says "i have anxiety" legal. As a first responder I support the tax amendment for those of use that become disabled while protecting the community. If you have strong feelings about that then perhaps you are not thinking about how much risk we take on to serve that those in the private sector dont. Great risk comes great reward. Its not for that poor bastard that gets disabled anyways, its to help ease the financial burden so they can feed thier kids on thier new reduced income. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Technically speaking, #2 is already legal in Florida. The Compassionate Medical Cannabis Act was passed in 2014. A person has to qualify and it's tightly regulated, but it is legal. Lots of people don't want the general public to know that. They also dont want people to know cancer patients have had access to thc pills for 20yrs. This is just some bullshit to make smoking a joint for any asshole that says "i have anxiety" legal. As a first responder I support the tax amendment for those of use that become disabled while protecting the community. If you have strong feelings about that then perhaps you are not thinking about how much risk we take on to serve that those in the private sector dont. Great risk comes great reward. Its not for that poor bastard that gets disabled anyways, its to help ease the financial burden so they can feed thier kids on thier new reduced income. Ohhh I just got into a big one with 2 guys on Fla Shooters Network over the first responder bill. He was calling all first responders basically crooks and thieves on in the line of duty disability and that no first responder hurt while trying to protect or rescue them deserves anything. First responders do not deserve anything if injuried to the point of being 100% disabled. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2016 8:40:37 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ohhh I just got into a big one with 2 guys on Fla Shooters Network over the first responder bill. He was calling all first responders basically crooks and thieves on in the line of duty disability and that no first responder hurt while trying to protect or rescue them deserves anything. First responders do not deserve anything if injuried to the point of being 100% disabled. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Technically speaking, #2 is already legal in Florida. The Compassionate Medical Cannabis Act was passed in 2014. A person has to qualify and it's tightly regulated, but it is legal. Lots of people don't want the general public to know that. They also dont want people to know cancer patients have had access to thc pills for 20yrs. This is just some bullshit to make smoking a joint for any asshole that says "i have anxiety" legal. As a first responder I support the tax amendment for those of use that become disabled while protecting the community. If you have strong feelings about that then perhaps you are not thinking about how much risk we take on to serve that those in the private sector dont. Great risk comes great reward. Its not for that poor bastard that gets disabled anyways, its to help ease the financial burden so they can feed thier kids on thier new reduced income. Ohhh I just got into a big one with 2 guys on Fla Shooters Network over the first responder bill. He was calling all first responders basically crooks and thieves on in the line of duty disability and that no first responder hurt while trying to protect or rescue them deserves anything. First responders do not deserve anything if injuried to the point of being 100% disabled. I'm still on the fence on this one, but leaning toward "no". While I respect the sacrifices made by our first responders, and the amendment SOUNDS good on the ballot, I'm still torn. I work in an environment that is "high risk" for potentially disabling injuries...and I pay for separate disability insurance to protect my family in the event of such a tragedy. Why shouldn't all people in high risk employment do the same? I get no pension or retirement benefits beyond the 401k that my employer no longer matches, and I get no annual "automatic" cost-of-living raises either. We CHOOSE our own career paths, and I think we should be personally responsible for the results of our own choices. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2016 8:46:31 PM EDT
[#32]
No body asked soldiers to enlist either and they should pay for health care and not get tax breaks either when they are 100% disabilied.
Who said that OBAMA You hate us when you don't need us but love firefighter and paramedics when you do. Vote you how ever you want. He said the samething you did. No one asked any first responder to do it. True but imagine if no one cared enough to do it. We don't do it for the money. We ....all of of us are will to die to save a live if need be and true no one asked us to do it. Even for people that think like you |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2016 10:42:07 PM EDT
[#33]
Military service, and domestic service are not equivalent, similar in some respects, but not the same. Suspending constitutional rights and being sent to a foreign country to serve and follow orders without question is on a whole different level. I'm not trying to insult your service as a first responder, but don't insult my intelligence and use Obamas BS as a defense. Comparing me to Obama is an un-called for insult of the highest degree. You should be ashamed.
I may not be running into burning buildings, but I've met a few firefighters, and police officers, that think what I do every day is crazy, and wouldn't follow me into the swamps. I've had no less than three former Marines work for me over the years, and they ALL said working on my crew was physically harder than the Corps. Point is, everyone that does real WORK makes personal sacrifices and risks in the interest of serving our clients, and should account for that in their family/future planning. Not to do so is irresponsible and foolish. Thank you for helping me make up my mind on this one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2016 11:09:43 PM EDT
[#34]
I did not help you make up anything you already state what you were going to do. Your job may be high risk. But unless it involves the lives of others there is no comparison. The burden of having others live in your hands is beyond just high risk. You live with the lives you've lost the rest of your life. . Either way this conversation is over and do not tell me there is a difference. Most of the firefighters, firemedics and paramedics are ex military. I'm an ex Army Ranger 1st Ranger Batt. whats the difference they all choose to serve and die if need be in service of others.
Your telling me just because one is civil and the other is government makes a difference. You need not respond because I can tell there is no winning in this debate. As a matter of fact this never was a debate. I just did not like the comparison you gave between your high risk without lives involved and our with lives. There is none. I've seen firefighter and firemedics die trying to save lifes. I've seen firefighters and firemedics commit suicide from the stress. My partner was one. Having to live I guess with the horrors of the things seen. I do not know. I wish I did. But he just cracked I guess. You do not hear about these deaths though because they are covered up. Yes your job is high risk. But do not compare it to ours. I will not respond any more to this post because I'm will not lower myself to your standard BS. Why did you even have to respond like you did unless you want to start an arguement. I'm done and yes you did talk just like Obama. The only thing I can think of from you description is that your a contractor and will work for who ever pays you. Like at the Bundy fiasco. Against Americans. So maybe I was wrong when I said there was not lifes involved Unsubscribed |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2016 11:30:38 PM EDT
[#35]
You were the one to start the insults here.
I had no intention of starting an argument, and didn't intend to insult you or your service, I was just expressing an opinion. Since that opinion differed from yours, you implied that I'm anti-first responder/hero, and just like Obama!?  .
Let's both stop the crap and let this thread get back on track. Edit to clarify my opinion: People in high-risk employment should carry accidental death and dismemberment insurance (as I do) to protect themselves and their family in the event of a tragedy. That is all I wanted to say, and was attacked for it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2016 12:37:47 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm still on the fence on this one, but leaning toward "no". While I respect the sacrifices made by our first responders, and the amendment SOUNDS good on the ballot, I'm still torn. I work in an environment that is "high risk" for potentially disabling injuries...and I pay for separate disability insurance to protect my family in the event of such a tragedy. Why shouldn't all people in high risk employment do the same? I get no pension or retirement benefits beyond the 401k that my employer no longer matches, and I get no annual "automatic" cost-of-living raises either. We CHOOSE our own career paths, and I think we should be personally responsible for the results of our own choices. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Technically speaking, #2 is already legal in Florida. The Compassionate Medical Cannabis Act was passed in 2014. A person has to qualify and it's tightly regulated, but it is legal. Lots of people don't want the general public to know that. They also dont want people to know cancer patients have had access to thc pills for 20yrs. This is just some bullshit to make smoking a joint for any asshole that says "i have anxiety" legal. As a first responder I support the tax amendment for those of use that become disabled while protecting the community. If you have strong feelings about that then perhaps you are not thinking about how much risk we take on to serve that those in the private sector dont. Great risk comes great reward. Its not for that poor bastard that gets disabled anyways, its to help ease the financial burden so they can feed thier kids on thier new reduced income. Ohhh I just got into a big one with 2 guys on Fla Shooters Network over the first responder bill. He was calling all first responders basically crooks and thieves on in the line of duty disability and that no first responder hurt while trying to protect or rescue them deserves anything. First responders do not deserve anything if injuried to the point of being 100% disabled. I'm still on the fence on this one, but leaning toward "no". While I respect the sacrifices made by our first responders, and the amendment SOUNDS good on the ballot, I'm still torn. I work in an environment that is "high risk" for potentially disabling injuries...and I pay for separate disability insurance to protect my family in the event of such a tragedy. Why shouldn't all people in high risk employment do the same? I get no pension or retirement benefits beyond the 401k that my employer no longer matches, and I get no annual "automatic" cost-of-living raises either. We CHOOSE our own career paths, and I think we should be personally responsible for the results of our own choices. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2016 8:30:42 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I haven't had a raise or COLA in over 6years. So please know what you are talking about before you go spreading lies that we get automatic raises. In 6yrs my health cost have trippled and coverage has gotten worse, you already know gas and food cost more then it did. And my paycheck is exactly the same. Oh, and the state of FL reniged on its contract with my pension and made changes. Anyone else ever able to make changes they wanted with the government on amy contract they signed? Its cool, you dont need to support first responders. Just dont ask for help then...and next time im picking up bits of a child or saved another life i will sit and reflect on all that hard work you do in the swamps (what ever the fuck that is) but hey this holloween lets count how many kids are firefighters and swamp workers? Just saying...im sure you can read between the lines (dont wanna insult your intelligence and all) Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: They also dont want people to know cancer patients have had access to thc pills for 20yrs. This is just some bullshit to make smoking a joint for any asshole that says "i have anxiety" legal. As a first responder I support the tax amendment for those of use that become disabled while protecting the community. If you have strong feelings about that then perhaps you are not thinking about how much risk we take on to serve that those in the private sector dont. Great risk comes great reward. Its not for that poor bastard that gets disabled anyways, its to help ease the financial burden so they can feed thier kids on thier new reduced income. Ohhh I just got into a big one with 2 guys on Fla Shooters Network over the first responder bill. He was calling all first responders basically crooks and thieves on in the line of duty disability and that no first responder hurt while trying to protect or rescue them deserves anything. First responders do not deserve anything if injuried to the point of being 100% disabled. I'm still on the fence on this one, but leaning toward "no". While I respect the sacrifices made by our first responders, and the amendment SOUNDS good on the ballot, I'm still torn. I work in an environment that is "high risk" for potentially disabling injuries...and I pay for separate disability insurance to protect my family in the event of such a tragedy. Why shouldn't all people in high risk employment do the same? I get no pension or retirement benefits beyond the 401k that my employer no longer matches, and I get no annual "automatic" cost-of-living raises either. We CHOOSE our own career paths, and I think we should be personally responsible for the results of our own choices. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2016 10:18:17 PM EDT
[#38]
It aint PR, its having a bitch mayor! Rick Scott is no friend of first responders aswell.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2016 11:23:23 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It aint PR, its having a bitch mayor! Rick Scott is no friend of first responders aswell. You wont get anywhere with these guys. I left the state 5 years ago - when they went full retard and started stealing benefits and otherwise being lowdown, lying, cheating scumbags. Yes, I'm referring to the rinos. I took my training, experience and talents down the road to the county. Much of the same crap - but at least they kept their promises. I applied 1 place - passed all of their checks/tests and got my start date....gave the state 2 weeks notice and never looked back. To me, a contract/promise is a contract/promise. Now retired and loving it. Shame these rinos are not much better than the libs. Just the other side of the same turd...... Had they been men/women of their word - I would probably still be working. I don't abide a liar. Spent the weekend up at an old co-workers place. I heard the same crap I used to hear for the last 10 years....The hiring standards are so low, along with the morale. It's embarrassing to have been employed by them......downhill and still sinking. At my part time job we had an ex trooper (only 8 years in) making 10.00/hour and loving it. He finally got a county job at a swimming pool at 14.00/hour plus benefits. HaHa, just typical of the state nowadays. Sad really - but you get what you pay for..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2016 7:33:46 AM EDT
[#40]
every one of these amendment initiatives deserves a NO vote. When special interest groups can't get the legislature to play ball with their nut job ideas, it goes on the amendment list.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2016 6:51:34 AM EDT
[#41]
Last night a radio channel was discussing how the FL Supreme Court is strongly considering REMOVING the solar energy Amendment 4 from the ballot for next week, NOV 8th. That'd be some quick court action!
There's been many complaints about how the ballot language is all jacked-up, but... the BIG issue, apparently an energy official was recorded saying the amendment was dubious, or something to that effect. Seems like Amendment 4 is a potential power grab by the energy companies. NO to Amendment 4 (if it even stays on the ballot this time). |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/3/2016 7:17:34 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Last night a radio channel was discussing how the FL Supreme Court is strongly considering REMOVING the solar energy Amendment 4 from the ballot for next week, NOV 8th. That'd be some quick court action! There's been many complaints about how the ballot language is all jacked-up, but... the BIG issue, apparently an energy official was recorded saying the amendment was dubious, or something to that effect. Seems like Amendment 4 is a potential power grab by the energy companies. NO to Amendment 4 (if it even stays on the ballot this time). |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2016 8:21:21 PM EDT
[#43]
pre-election day bump. thanks for the amendment info, gents. was about to start a thread asking opinions on them, & saw someone had already done it for me.
getting up early to get my vote in tomorrow. #MAGA 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2016 10:06:15 PM EDT
[#44]
I'm always leery of amendments. Legislate it. Once it's an amendment good luck getting rid of it later.
Labarga is a now. There were a couple of appellate judges I couldn't find anything on unfortunately. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/7/2016 10:23:55 PM EDT
[#45]
Whenever confronted with a proposed constitutional amendment, my first question is why the hell should this be in our constitution. Rarely can I come up with a good reason. Thus, rarely do I vote for proposed amendments, even those that would implement policies I favor.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2016 2:47:44 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Morgan and morgan..... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If a lawyer is for the "Medical pot" then there has to be some way he is profiting from his "Compassion" VOTE NO TO DRUGS! It's my understanding that the lawyer pushing this one has already set in place the growing, transporting, and distribution network needed. Go figure. Earlier this year when I drove to PA I heard his commercials all the way to the Carolina's. Morgan and morgan..... ...and Suntan Charlie 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2016 6:26:24 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: every one of these amendment initiatives deserves a NO vote. When special interest groups can't get the legislature to play ball with their nut job ideas, it goes on the amendment list. Yup. Was just talking about this with my buddy you've met on the hikes. Their just trying to push shit through. Also the pot deal allows caregivers to possess..etc etc Iirc. Anyone wanna guess how many care givers are in the hood....... A fuck ton. Wanna know why. Because it's how they work the system ...the pot amendment will get abused just as bad. Hell just legalize it and be done. No sweat off my ass. But don't add it as an amendment. And the it's illegal to be 100% off grid in Florida is the most asinine thing ever. Want a solar amendment....strike that shit down..make it legal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/8/2016 7:11:48 AM EDT
[#48]
Each amendment deserves assessment.
Our state ban on Eminent Domain abuse was passed by amendment. voting no on one. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
