I was contemplating this today for whatever reason…something like this has to be handled just right, or you’re not getting a dime of that insurance money. Best to involve a boat, ala Krusty the Clown, for the most obvious reason of ‘who’s going to lease a deep sea diving aparatus to find my remains?’ My guess, nobody. So as long as there’s an explosion, some way of proving you were out at sea before you disappeared, and wreckage for the coast guard to recover, the first part is covered. Then comes hooking up a new identity, getting a chunk of the policy money and finding a beach to chill on for the rest of your life.
The hitch of course being that there has to be a trustworthy person involved who won’t renig on the deal once you resurface to cash in. Thinking that ‘they’ll lose the money as well if I’m caught’ isn’t good enough, as love, greed and stupidity are rampant in our culture. It’d have to be the best friend you’ve ever had, but even then it’s fishy-looking because the beneficiary can’t be your friend who lives on the other side of the country when you’ve got a wife and kids at home. The second they see that, it’s probably going on the local news, people are hating your guts forever, and your chances for a happy ending will mostly depend on whether jumping off of a three story building gets it done or simply eases your transition from sick asshole to sick asshole in traction at the county jail awaiting trial.
And that’s where the whole thing goes wrong, this idea that suicide isn’t enough, it’s the money. So you really didn’t want to die, you just wanted to feel like a big shot and couldn’t figure out how to do it honestly. Something like this is purely a scheme for the movies, but I’m sure people try it. If I were a half foot shorter, a lot more patient and clever…I could probably do well working for the insurance companies, tracking these people down. In fact, I’m already in talks with CBS on a pilot for a show that deals with this exact concept.
Of course the most brilliant scheme along these lines was thought of by Shakespere, but those lovestruck fools were too something or other to make it work. Spy Game ripped it off when Brad Pitt gets injected with whatever it was that made his heart stop so the Chinese prison officials wouldn’t get wise to whatever he was doing.
Screw messing with chemicals…if any of the 3 or 4 people reading this ever decide to go through with it, stick with a boat explosion. That’s the best way to do it I think. Unless you could involve foul play at a crematorium…wait, that wouldn’t work either. Because when Nate and David switched ashes on Six Feet Under, they got pinched by a friend of the dead’s family. Yea, best to stick with a boat. Anyone else got a better idea?
That’s actually one of the better ideas. Most people just disappear off the face of the earth. That creeps me the fuck out like nothing else. These people who go to the store for a pack of cigarettes and are never seen again. Freaky.
Dissapear off of a cruise ship? Dissapear from Aruba. Almost every episode of Nancy Grace has at least one good idea.
If you are planning something like this I have to think putting it on your web-site is going to make people suspicious.
That’s the beauty of it…they wouldn’t think I was stupid enough to describe it here…heh.
A scheme that would definitely work on South Park!
They’d think Chris has lost his mind Karl, and we all know that can’t be true now can it? : P
Chris cannot just dissapear, this is the only web-site that has not banned me.
more on hunting:
Closing Down the Safari Swindle
The U.S. Congress is on the verge of closing a tax loophole that has allowed trophy hunters to take big tax breaks for their big game safaris. Regular readers of HumaneLines have watched this issue wind its way through the legislative process. Your help is needed today to put the final nail in the coffin of this safari swindle.
The effort to close the trophy tax loophole began when an undercover HSUS investigation revealed that wealthy hunters were killing a few “extra” animals, donating the trophies to pseudo-museums (sometimes the “museums” are literally in someone’s basement) then inflating the value of these trophies and taking a huge tax deduction for their “charitable” contributions. This sickening scam allows trophy hunters to kill rare exotic animals for free, reaping the benefits from a sort of “frequent-slayer program.”
After The HSUS blew the lid off this scam, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley (R-IA) told The Washington Post, “The equivalent for non-hunters would be if someone bought What You Can Do
a sweater in Paris, donated it to Goodwill, and took a tax deduction for the entire trip to Paris.” Senator Grassley included language in the massive Tax Relief Act that would end the taxidermy tax scam and Grassley’s bill passed the U.S. Senate. Congressional tax experts estimate that closing this loophole will save American taxpayers $43 million over the next ten years.
A different version of this bill passed in the U.S. House and did not include the trophy hunting tax loophole language. The differences between the two bills must now be ironed out and folded into one final bill. This negotiation is the responsibility of a few select members of the House and Senate tax writing committees. The final negotiated version of the bill, the conference report, will be voted on again before it is sent to President Bush for his signature.
Please ask your U.S. Representative, Bob Beauprez, to urge the House Ways and Means Committee (the tax writing committee) to support the Grassley taxidermy tax scam language in the Tax Relief Act Conference Report. In order to eliminate the trophy hunting tax loophole, the Grassley language must be included in the final version of the bill.
The safari lobby must be up in arms over this. I don’t see what the big deal is…just last week I went on a safari of my own here in Massachusetts…got on my segway and shot at ferel cats…
until the owner of one ran out and informed me that I had shot and killed Mittens.
You are a hero bravely taking on attack mittens.
This is an animal rights story, sort of fits with the ferral cats:
BY JANET CAGGIANO AND DAVID RESS
TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITERS Feb 25, 2006
Makeshift memorials have sprung up at Maymont, where a vigil is planned outside the 2-acre bear habitat today at noon. (JOE MAHONEY/TIMES-DISPATCH)
Richmond Mayor L. Douglas Wilder said yesterday that the city will investigate “the rush to judgment” that led to the deaths of Maymont’s two black bears and whether the parent of a child bitten by one of the animals was negligent.
One of the child’s parents entered a restricted area with the 4-year-old boy by climbing a wooden fence, Julia Dixon, spokeswoman for the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, said yesterday.
Park’s 2 bears killed after bite
Maymont bears do not have rabies
“I just have not seen nor have I heard any justification for the killing of the bears,” Wilder said. “I think it is one of the most reprehensible as well as senseless things to have occurred, and I would call it nonsensical bureaucracy.”
Wilder made the announcement during a news conference yesterday that came a few hours after test results confirmed that neither bear had rabies.
At Maymont, visitors left flowers, teddy bears and signed cards in memory of the two bears, ages 9 and 12. A vigil is planned outside the 2-acre bear habitat today
This is a tricky case…sure they shouldn’t have broken in, but if a bear…or any animal bit one of my sons, I’d probably do the same thing…then again, I don’t carry a gun.
The problem as I see it is that they killed the bears so that they could test them for rabies. It is very unlikely that the bears had rabies. Seems like a better way to handle the situation would be to treat the child like he was exposed to rabies, which I think involves a bunch of painful shots and leave the bears alone.
The bears probably did not need to be killed to protect the child, if they were in the process of mauling the child that would be a different situation.
Children are such a bother. Much easier to have bears…
Eventually kids move out.
If they hunted these bears and killed them for that purpose, they should be arrested and charged with a crime…the dad, unless he had any other adults w/ him.
You can’t go killing animals for that purpose. If you come face to face w/ a bear and live, the shots should be the least of your concerns!!!
I hate how some humans feel like they own the place…if a family of bears lives for over 10 years, why should they die for the sake of a kid who got away alive?
That pisses me off…
I hate how some humans feel like they own the place…if a family of bears lives for over 10 years, why should they die for the sake of a kid who got away alive?
This gave me a laugh because I saw an editorial cartoon with 2 panes and in the first pane there was a growling mama bear and a baby bear with the caption that said never get inbetween a Mother Bear protecting her cub.
In the second pane was a female activist and the caption said never get inbetween a feminist trying to abort her baby.
Chris, with approx 2 millions abortions per year in the U.S. alone, I couldn’t give a rats ass how many bears, seagulls, squirrells, octopi and oragutans people shoot for fun.
If a human life has no value then why should I care about animals?
Right:
Thats a false comparison. Kids and animals are different creatures with vastly different rights. I wish it was legal to shoot nuisance teenagers, but as far as I know that is illegal.
socialism wal-mart style:
WASHINGTON – Wal-Mart’s chief executive told America’s governors on Sunday that he needs their help to make health care more affordable and accessible for the retail giant’s 1.3 million U.S. employees because the company can’t do it alone.
Lee Scott said Wal-Mart’s health care costs have risen 19 percent in each of the last three years and that it’s only a matter of time before it, along with other businesses, cannot sustain rising costs.
Right, a false comparison indeed…never mind the fact that you’re claiming a moral high ground in order to not care about matters pertaining to morality.
Like saying…’I was hungry the other day, so what do I care about anyone who’s starving’
Karl – I resent the fact that WalMart dumps their health care on the states, but at this point it should be obvious to everyone that relying on corporations to provide employees health care is unfair to everyone involved.
Corporations should be able to focus on their business and the government should provide health care. How many more bankruptcies or years of rising health care costs do we need to see before national health care becomes a matter for Congress to take up?
karl says:
Right:
Thats a false comparison. Kids and animals are different creatures with vastly different rights.
Chris Austin says:
Right, a false comparison indeed
FALSE COMPARISON????? Let me introduce you two to a little thing I like to call logic. The statemenet If they hunted these bears and killed them for that purpose, they should be arrested and charged with a crime…the dad, unless he had any other adults w/ him. implies that it was bad to shoot the bears.
Then there was this little gem I hate how some humans feel like they own the place…if a family of bears lives for over 10 years, why should they die for the sake of a kid who got away alive?
Now getting back to Karl’s statement Kids and animals are different creatures with vastly different rights
I think Karl was trying to say that people have more rights than animals. The contridiciton is that we treat the animals with more respect that human babies, which some people are content to pull half way out of a uterus and jam a pair of scissors in his or her brain.
I don’t see any rantings about arresting abortionists and charging them with a crime, jamming scissors in a babies brain is a “constitutional right” but jamming shooting a bears that attacked humans is animal cruelty, or worse. Thus, the comparison is totally valid.
So to sum up discussion: bears bite kids, people kill bears, Karls thinks the kids should suffer unnecessary and painful rabies treatments to protect bears, thus, bears are supposedly more important than people.
So, logically, the comparison is completely valid and stands on it’s merits. So again I ask If a human life has no value then why should I care about animals?
Right:
You are trying to compare viable life, i.e living breathing animals that can survive on their own. To a few cells that are completely dependant on another being for their life, again I say it is a false comparison.
If you want to give bears abortions be my guest. In fact somewhere I read that wildlife officials were trying to give deer a pill that caused abortions to cut down on over population(I saw the article a long time ago, so I may not have the species right) I have no problem with that.
Remember to spay and neuter your children 🙂
You are trying to compare viable life, i.e living breathing animals that can survive on their own. To a few cells that are completely dependant on another being for their life, again I say it is a false comparison.
Like animals, if left on their own babies would survive. Interfering in nature whether it has fur or not is similar and, thus, an accurate comparison. A few cells, first trimester, second trimester, third trimester, all would survive on their own without interference just like the animals.
If you want to give bears abortions be my guest.
Animal cruelty, that’s against the law. Besides, PETA would be all over my ass, as would most liberals.
In fact somewhere I read that wildlife officials were trying to give deer a pill that caused abortions to cut down on over population(I saw the article a long time ago, so I may not have the species right) I have no problem with that.
And you shouldn’t, they are animals.
Remember to spay and neuter your children
I’m focusing on the boyfriends at this point, I figure my daughter’s ability to have children won’t affect the swarm of losers she will attract. That she can get pregnant might give one or two of ’em something to think about before they do something stupid. The others, I’ll castrate them myself :- )
Crickets Chriping……
Right:
I guess you can neuter all your daughters boyfriends
Poor, defenseless…
An embryo? How about a fully grown living being? South Dakota is throwing their weight around right now on the abortion debate, yet once those kids are squeezed through the birth canal and out of the vagina…
Fuck em’!
And that’s the case across the country. I know that religious ideologes call statistics the work of the devil, but how does one reconcile the state of affairs in social services and education in this country, while at the same time, advocating for every child that’s not even born yet?!?!
Notice that the pro-life crowd doesn’t give a damn about what happens once these unwanted kids enter the world…in fact, traditionally, they’re the same ones pushing for manditory minimums…
Abortion…I could care less one way or the other, but once these kids are toddlers, their political usefullness is expired, and therefore, they’re useless to those who want to overturn our laws…
Right, I’m understanding of the fact that you feel passionate about this, as is the case with our friend Michael…but, the fact that these same groups aren’t speaking out about what happens once these children are born…
That’s what drove me away from the pro-life ideology…because the fact is…they care more about an embryo than they do a 3 year old child. Once the kid is born, their political usefullness is expired, and there goes the support.
Tell me it’s not true…I’d like to hear this…
Abortion is a tough issue. No one wants one, but it effects the mother and it is her body so it should be her choice.
How about a fully grown living being? South Dakota is throwing their weight around right now on the abortion debate, yet once those kids are squeezed through the birth canal and out of the vagina…
Fuck em’!
So the answer is to kill them so they aren’t a drag on the rest of us? Potential drag, that is, we won’t ever know their capabilities but we do know they most likely will be born into a poor family. ‘Hey kid, you might have a rough childhood so we are going to help you out by sucking your brain through this little tube and into the trash.’
but, the fact that these same groups aren’t speaking out about what happens once these children are born…
Means what? The idea is to give everyone a chance, not guarantee a make-a-wish day, every day, for every child. What makes you think that their life would be so bad if they did, in deed, live?
Tell me it’s not true…I’d like to hear this…
The 3 year old ins’t in danger of having their brains sucked out. If people were euthanizing 3 year olds you bet your ass the pro-lifers would go ape shit.
No one wants one, but it effects the mother and it is her body so it should be her choice.
I was her choice the moment she had sex, should we really be able to kill people because their parents either changed their minds or are just plain idiots?
Question : What is a synonym for abortion?
Murder
Right:
I get the impression that you want to make pregnancie likely to discourage people from having sex. At least it seems that is what happens when you allow pharmacists to start regulating who gets birth control. Abstinence only education is the same thing. Effectively people who advocate abstinence only education are saying,”don’t have sex, but if you do makes sure you get pregnant”. Why else would anyone try to keep people from being vaccinated against the papilmo(sic) virus. Once people have children their is a goal to make their lives more difficult through cuts to things like the school lunch program and medicaid. As well as cuts to pre-natal programs. All so certain people can say “see what happens when you have sex”.
Conservatives do not care about babies, but they sure seem inerested in sex, and more specificaly who is having it.
So you find nothing ironic at all about the fact that South Dakota is aiming to lead the charge to overturn our nation’s abortion laws, yet rank at the bottom in terms of child poverty (not enough $ to feed the child) and child education (you’ll be qualified to work as a gravedigger, but a cash register is too complicated).
Get poor, cold, rural, uneducated folk to change the country’s abortion laws…that makes sence…seeing how good they do with them once they pop these little miracles out.
Over20% of them end up hooked on meth and in jail.
Rural America’s motto: “WE SUCK, BUT ARE TOO DUMB TO REALIZE IT…PRAISE JESUS…AND METHAMPHETAMINE!”
I get the impression that you want to make pregnancie likely to discourage people from having sex.
No, that part of the conversation was in jest in response to your spay/neuter comment. The joke is a Father will look to any microscopic detail that might keep a letch off his daughter. It’s not about virginity until marriage anymore, it’s how far past 12 years old can your daughter keep her virginity?
At least it seems that is what happens when you allow pharmacists to start regulating who gets birth control.
That is a REAL freedom of choice issue, forcing a business to sell a product it isn’t interested in selling is completely wrong. Suppose this abortion pill is found to cause cancer and people start suing walmart for selling the abortion/cancer pill. Walmart didn’t want it in the first place but now they have to pay a huge settlement to cancer victims.
Birth control is one thing, I’m fine with that, it’s forcing pharamacists to stop being pharamcists and to become abortionists against thier will.
Why else would anyone try to keep people from being vaccinated against the papilmo(sic) virus. Once people have children their is a goal to make their lives more difficult through cuts to things like the school lunch program and medicaid. As well as cuts to pre-natal programs. All so certain people can say “see what happens when you have sex”.
You’ve lost me on this part. Who is reducing medicaid and school lunch?
Conservatives do not care about babies, but they sure seem inerested in sex, and more specificaly who is having it.
Conservatives care about people and society, this is why I made the switch about 8 years ago after high school. Now that I have a child I really want to make sure there is something here for her when I am gone.
The only government spending Bush and Co have reduced is medicaid, and funding for the school lunch program. Two programs that definitely effect children.
I agree that if Wal-Mart does not want the liability that goes with pharmacuticals they should get out of the business, if not they should do what the Dr tells them.
If you are concerned with the future of the US, maybe a good place to start would be Bush’s latest idiocy of selling off private lands, it would be nice for your daughter to have a chance to visit a national forest. Right now the repubs seem to modeling the US after a 3rd world country with no infrastructure and no corporate control, I doubt that is a future anyone wants for their children.
Plus, you probably want your duaghter to grow up to be more than just a baby machine. I would argue that a lot of people in your party don’t share that goal, or at least persue policies that make it difficult for women to achieve anything but motherhood.
I agree with you about the whole 12 year-old and virginity thing. That sounds like a law we could live with.
Karl I am all for sex and I enjoy it. I do think that people should use common sense when it comes to having sex-a little thought may avert a whole lot of pain later! It’s all too easy today to abort a fetus and a lot of abortions could have been prevented by birth control and common sense. I am sure that you agree. 🙂
Maybe we need to outlaw abortion and legalize meth. That way the whole US could look like SD
Want to disappear Chris? Take the red eye to Baghdad get in a cab with a guy named Ahmad and pick a street corner . Do they spare Americans who are Liberals per chance? 🙂
Paul:
Sounds like we hav found some common ground, at least on abrtion.
Just saw this, the next few years are going to interesting on this issue:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President George W. Bush said on Tuesday said his view on abortion differs from that of a South Dakota measure that would ban the practice in all cases except when the mother’s life was at stake.
The South Dakota bill — the most restrictive measure on abortion in decades — has been described by the state’s governor as a direct assault on the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion.
Supporters hope the conflict it sets up with the Roe vs. Wade decision will give two conservative Supreme Court justices newly appointed by Bush an opportunity to overturn the ruling.
Bush told ABC News in an interview that he has not paid close attention to the South Dakota bill but said his position would allow three exceptions to a ban on abortion, as opposed to one in the state law.
The same people who want to criminalize abortion also don’t want people to have access to birth control. Right Thinker has argued that abortion should be illegal AND that WalMart should be able to choose to not issue birth control.
This is the very reason why I went from pro-life to neutral on the subject. The advocates have an unrealistic view of how things should be, and when it comes right down to it, this legal medical procedure has given them a sweet method of proclaiming to be holyier than thou for many many years now.
Criminalizing abortion does not reduce the number of them that take place. Birth control limits the amount that take place whether legally or illegally.
I’m in favor of whatever will make the public safer. I’m quite sure that the evangelicals feel that all this country needs is a steady dose of religion, but of course…this is America, not Iraq or Iran or Syria!
Aren’t christians the ones who have prolems with virgin births. If some diety is going to rape a poor virgin she needs a method to get rid of the fetus.
Seriously, the right seems to feel that enough religion can cure all of societys ills, they do not seem to understand that realty sometimes creeps in to their dream world. One of the funniest things has been watching James Dobson try to endorse a same sex partner agreement, admitting that in reality these partnerships happen, while claiming that he is protecting marriage. Reality always intrudes on the views of the right, just like it intrudes on the utopian views of the left.
The same people who want to criminalize abortion also don’t want people to have access to birth control. Right Thinker has argued that abortion should be illegal AND that WalMart should be able to choose to not issue birth control.
You are mistaken, birth control never came up. The issue is the governemnt illegally forcing private companies into the abortion business. With birth control so readily available why do we need to force walmart to dispense the abortion pill, especially since there are so many other outlets for it down the street?
Walmart is, and should be, required to dispense all commonly prescribed medicines, a categorty of which the abortion pill does not reside. The law is clear but the liberal pharmacy board thinks the law is irrelevant.
The advocates have an unrealistic view of how things should be, and when it comes right down to it, this legal medical procedure has given them a sweet method of proclaiming to be holyier than thou for many many years now.
The social engeneering you are advocating should never happen in a free society. We have fought so many wars to free us from government, liberal and religious tyrany it is a shame that these issues are starting to get through. Killing people because we don’t like their poverty is just plain wrong.
Criminalizing abortion does not reduce the number of them that take place. Birth control limits the amount that take place whether legally or illegally.
1/2 right, Criminalizing abortion will greatly reduce the number of abortions and encourage people to take responsibility with birth control.
I’m in favor of whatever will make the public safer.
I’m pretty sure the recreational slaughter of almost 2 million people a year isn’t all that great for public safety.
some diety is going to rape a poor virgin she needs a method to get rid of the fetus.
The deity in question should be forced to pay child support and maintain the lifestyle the virgin was accustomed to before said impregnating.
Right:
Maybe the Virgin Mary should have sued for child support.
karl says:
Right:
Maybe the Virgin Mary should have sued for child support.
And, eventually, ended up on Springer.
Joseph was the one who got screwed in that deal!
Think about how you’d feel if your old lady came home with that story…
I support Denmark ! Do you Chris and Karl?
Joseph doesn’t even get mentioned much in the bible, he really did get the short end.
Paul:
I support anybodies right to make offensive cartoons. To me, a lot of the problem with the world is people are killing eachother for things that just don’t matter. Who cares what someone writes about the holocaust, or what someone writes about Allah. Sticks and stones, but some people are so caught up in their make believe worlds that instead of using words they have to go blow eachother up. It reminds me of the gang shootings that you read about where on kid shot another kid because he “disrespected” him.
Trying to make this thread drift even more:
OBAMA’S ENERGY PLAN….Knight Ridder reports that Barack Obama has proposed a deal with the auto industry:
The federal government would pay 10 percent of the $6.7 billion in annual health costs for retirees that are weighing down General Motors, Ford and Chrysler if they’ll commit to building more fuel-efficient cars, Obama proposed in a speech Tuesday before a panel at the National Governors Association conference. He called it a “win-win proposal for the industry.”
Aye Carumba, I can’t believe it. Is that a Democrat with an actual idea??? I haven’t seen that since…well, I’ve never seen it actually. This is going on the calendar.
The details are at washingtonmonthly.com it is at least starting point.
Denmark? Of course! Coppenhagen is a great place for a lot of different reasons…just north is the homeland of my ancestors (Finland). Was kind of disappointed in myself for not having made it up there during my time living in Germany, but it was expensive…and w/ COLA at E-4 pay I was only clearing a little over $1000 a month.
Why is it I think of herring everytime I close my eyes and try to picture Finland?
I do know that my ability to put down shots has to have something to do with that place.
Chris I am nominating you for Finn of the Year! 🙂
Wisenheimer:
You mentioned that you follow Natalee Holloway, what do you make of Greta Van Sustern coming out and saying she does not think Joran Vandersloot did it? The soap opera gets better and better.
BTW, I am pretty sure Bush did it