Are you aware of the history between myrkul and I? Probably not. Don't make our fight yours.
And have your insults ever done more than display your inability to discuss rationally the topics in which you are emotionally invested?
No, I think not.
Actually, my insults of you were and are a direct reflection of the absurdity and naivete of your views. You made a statement implying that being held financially liable for damages equates to actual compensation to victims. Change your tune, and I'll change my observations of you.
Insults do not change minds. Rational discussion does. Prove my ideas wrong, and I will discard them. Insult me or them, and I will understand that you are incapable of doing more than flailing around on the ground like a child.
You deserve insulting simply by your demand that I prove your claim wrong. I don't need to prove your claim wrong, as that is work for me that I didn't sign up for.
You seem to want me to change my mind. If that is your desire, You'll have to show me that I'm wrong. If you don't want to put out that effort, I suggest you just leave me be. That is, after all, all
I desire, to be left alone.
Honest questions: Do you honestly get off insisting something that is obviously not true just because it fits your political belief? Do you actually believe the crap you say?
What is it that I have said that is "obviously not true"?
Simple fact: victims are not always compensated just because the courts say someone needs to pay them. And if they are compensated, it's rarely in a timely matter, nor in full.
True, which is what insurance is for.
Fun fact: 13% of Texas drivers have no insurance (this makes them criminals).
In Mississippi, 26% of drivers have no insurance (again, this makes them criminals).
In New Hampshire, 9% of drivers have no insurance. Unlike the other states, this does not make them criminals....