100 Dollar Bills

The other night I pull up to this house and the woman goes to hand me a $100 bill. I say, “I don’t have change for that.” I might have had enough change if they wanted to give me a $20 tip, but even in Stamford it wasn’t likely. So they wind up calling the store and giving a credit card, and, out of spite: no tip! Fuckers. I don’t get why people don’t understand it’s dangerous for driver to have change for $100 on them. If you need to break a hundred, why not just call the store and ask? I know why people do it: they know the store might say no, so they take their chances.

But that brings me to my next question: why take it in the first place? People take $100s then go to gas stations and such and use them for small purchases. Know why no one likes them? It fucks up the drawer! You have to give all your change to the idiot that took the $100 instead of $20s at the bank. Then you have to go to the bank the idiot took the $100 from and have them make change for you. It makes ZERO sense. And 99 out of 100 times people that use $100s give really shitty tips. It’s usually either nothing, or one to two dollars. It’s like they want to impress us with their possession of the hundred, but not reward us with generosity for making change of it. It’s super fucking annoying. I’ve seen hundreds before you assholes. You know when I take hundreds? For big purchases like tvs, or if i have to pay a big bill like rent. That’s it. I don’t take them so I can try to impress people and fuck up their cash registers or make the pizza guy go run down the street with it to make change.

Stop using them. Seriously. Get in the habit of using $50s if you have to use a large bill. That order was $35. I had change for that.

The Driver (Adam Smith)

© Adam Smith and drivershout.wordpress.com, 2009. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Adam Smith and drivershout.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape

Creative Commons License
“Kick Rocks” Pizza Delivery Nightmares by Adam Smith is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License

Email "The Driver"

Is the Second Amendment “Inalienable” or not?

Webster defines “inalienable” as: incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred.

If one commits a felony, ANY felony including writing a bad check from 30 years ago, you’re considered to dangerous to own a gun. People who torture animals in most states are not considered too dangerous, nor are drunk drivers. Go figure. Also, in-patient psychiatric care, possession of more than an ounce of weed, and domestic violence strips you of that right. Some states have that law where if your wife hits you and you call the cops you both get arrested. So you could lose your right to bear arms for being the victim of domestic abuse. Nice.

Anyway, no other Constitutional right is stripped away by the federal government for life. None. Not one. Some of you might think of voting, but that’s a state issue. You could just move and get your voting rights back. The one right that claims to be inalienable is the one right that you can lose.

So how is it inalienable? If inalienable means it can’t be stripped or given away, why do those people lose that right? Does that mean those circumstances somehow protect you from violence? If you get robbed, if you say you’re a convicted felon does the robber apologize and let you go on your way? Strangely, under that same right to bear arms you can’t have bullet-proof vests, tasers, even stun guns.

My point is the Second Amendment was supposed to be as strong as the First Amendment, but somehow with that one mistake, and after any amount of time, you appear to lose the right to defend your life or the lives of others around you. Why? How can something that can’t be taken away be taken away? And why do the gun nuts support that? The NRA is a proud supporter of stripping gun rights away from certain people, not realizing in doing so, they weaken the idea that gun ownership is a sovereign right. It really isn’t.

And some people will point out you can have those rights restored. Not really. Look it up: it can be done in THEORY, but almost never happens. There have been a handful of cases where it happened of millions who have tried. Some states make exceptions, like Texas and Colorado, and in some states if there’s no separate law the BATF still allows certain firearms to be held. Black powder, non-standard rimfire, replicas of antiques, antiques, etc, but nothing practical.

Lastly, the only one the Federal laws protect anyone from are people who made mistakes who are following the law after that. Any street criminal wont be spending years bettering themselves and obeying the laws to not own. They’d just go get one. So I don’t even see the point in the law. I just want to know what you think about “inalienable”.

The Driver (Adam Smith)

© Adam Smith and drivershout.wordpress.com, 2009. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Adam Smith and drivershout.wordpress.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape

Creative Commons License
“Kick Rocks” Pizza Delivery Nightmares by Adam Smith is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License

Email "The Driver"