text:
|Forum Rules
|Firearms Safety
|Firearms Photos
|Lost Password
|Email Changes
|Today's Posts
|Mark Forums Read
|View Poll Results: Would you sue someone who shot you no matter the circumstances or explanation?
|Yes, I would sue no matter the circumstances or explanation.
|No, I would weigh the circumstances and explanation carefully.
|Voters: 127. You may not vote on this poll
|Thread Tools
|Search this Thread
|July 25, 2010, 06:50 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Location: Kodiak, Alaska
Posts: 2,118
If I do have a lasting debilitating injuries, it'll be okay. I can become a gunsmith and make a living that way!!
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." -Richard Henry Lee, Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights.
|July 25, 2010, 10:15 PM
Junior member
Join Date: July 11, 2010
Posts: 73
Thanks guys for replying to this thread and voting in the poll. I just wanted to see who would file a lawsuit no matter what happened. Some folks even responded in the thread with logic and wisdom to justify their stance of sueing no matter the explanation.
I think what it comes down to is the new attitude in America that "someone has to pay". Obviously, the bad guy getting shot probably doesnt have any money or homeowner's insurance so they cant really be sued. Well, they can, but its like trying to knock through a solid brick wall with your fists. So they go for the good guy who probably has a home or other insurance because he is the only one that can pay and it if it were not for his actions then they wouldnt have been shot in the first place.
I guess all this twisted logic leads me to believe in one thing. Dont get yourself in the situation in the first place if at all possible. Avoid getting into a shooting match with someone because in the end someone will probably sue and/or the prosecutor might get you too.
At the end of the day, $$$$ and who is going to pay the bill is all what some people think in America. They are not glad to be alive or happy that the bad guy was aprehended. They just want money for themselves or their family and everything else is second nature.
|July 25, 2010, 10:29 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 2,905
You can call our logic "twisted", but frankly, I'm baffled at your idea that the shooter shouldn't be held responsible for the round he put downrange into my skinny ass. "Oops - my bad" may work on the basketball court, but I'm not going to take a huge financial hit and spend the rest of my life paying off my medical bills because good old "Cross-eyed Larry" couldn't keep his shots on target.
And you say we should be "glad to be alive". Pretty glib of you, considering that there's a very real chance that we might have escaped completely unscathed if not for the well-intentioned shooter's wayward shot.
|July 25, 2010, 10:46 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: June 9, 2010
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 272
Depending on the circumstances I guess it would depend...
But its hard to say what you would do till you were in that situation
|July 25, 2010, 10:55 PM
Junior member
Join Date: July 11, 2010
Posts: 73
All I am asking is if you would be willing to listen and consider the explanation and circumstance before filing a lawsuit or if you would just file anyway no matter what the circumstances are involved.
Ultimately, someone has insurance and your medical bills would be paid for. I think most of us here have medical insurance or can make claims under medicaid/medicare. The shooter probably will have homeowner's insurance to protect themselves. Most decent jobs have disability insurance. All businesses have some type of insurance. The hospital wants to get paid so they will assist the homeless man in filing out the state medicare/medicaid forms and they will be compensated. So someone is going to pay your bills...
I am just wondering if you would take it further then just medical bills and go out of your way to file a lawsuit for much more then just your bills. Im certain that most people filing a lawsuit are not just worried about their bills. Most lawsuits seek millions in cash rather then 10-20k for what they spent on you at the hospital.
|July 25, 2010, 11:00 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 2,905
Second - you did a better job of posing your question in your last post than you have in the entire poll/thread. If it been clear from the start that you're talking about suing for an amount above and beyond my legitimate expenses, basically trying to take an opportunity for a lottery-like payday, then I would have voted differently.
|July 25, 2010, 11:17 PM
Junior member
Join Date: July 11, 2010
Posts: 73
I cant imagine a circumstance where an insurance company would not pay for all of your reasonable medical bills. The point you are trying to assert is a rare case where the medical bills would not be paid for. Employed individuals usually have some type of health insurance and disability. My employer has many different options they offer to include long term disability. Then we have the state which provides various funding through medicare/medicaid. We also have various business and homeowner's insurance plans.
Lets take illegal aliens for example. Even illegal aliens would not be refused admission to the hospital and the bills might hit their credit reports if they had a social security #. Their bills too would eventually hit the state under various funding programs.
So you argue that you would file a suit because your bills wont get paid, but they probably will get paid. So what are you debating about? Are you unemployed and do not have any health insurance? Is that why you would file a suit?
Well, lets say you are unemployed with no health insurance and there is no other insurance then we turn to the state violent crime compensation fund.
Every state has one. So the point is moot. Your bills will be paid no matter the circumstance. So why file suit if all your bills will be eventually paid by some entity?
Last edited by usaign; July 25, 2010 at 11:23 PM.
|July 25, 2010, 11:47 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 2,905
I don't think you have the first inkling as to how much a serious injury costs to treat. See my earlier example of my $140k hospital bill. That was for a 12-day stay and one operation, and except for some broken bones in my hand, all of the damage was limited to one leg. Internal injuries requiring a longer stay and/or multiple surgeries could easily make my bill look like chump change.
While it's true that the shooter might have insurance, look up what the liability limits are for many such policies. Not everyone is walking around with a multi-million dollar umbrella policy. And insurance companies are not exactly known for being "Johnny on the spot" when it comes to paying out claims, even for legitimate, documented medical expenses. In many cases, a lawsuit is going to be the only way to pry a payment from them. And while I do have insurance, they're going to go after the shooter and his insurance company first, and I'm going to have to be a party to that lawsuit, testify, etcetera.
As for the state victim's defense funds, look into how much they actually cover, *if* your claim is approved. To use Texas as an example, the cap is $50k, and they'll only pay out after every other resource has been exhausted (shooter's insurance, Medicare/Medicaid, Worker's Comp if applicable, etcetera.) You might qualify for an additional $75k to cover long-term expenses, but only in the case of permanent, total disability.
In short, you can say "the bills are going to get paid" all day long, but the reality is that it's not likely to happen without a lawsuit to help it along.
|July 25, 2010, 11:49 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: February 27, 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 392
Well let's turn this around...
Suppose YOU were the one who shot an innocent bystander in the course of stopping a crime? Now the guy is laying there in a pool of his own blood hanging on by a thread. So what are you going do?
"I'm really sorry I shot you. You got insurance, right?"
Even if the guy has insurance, are you just going to walk away and let him shoulder the burden? If you have any sort of conscience, you are going to offer to pay his bills.
If I get shot by an otherwise well-meaning person and they do not at least offer to pay my medical bills, you bet your ass I'm going to sue him!
"I don't like repeat offenders, I like dead offenders!" Ted Nugent
Last edited by scottaschultz; July 26, 2010 at 12:01 AM.
|July 26, 2010, 12:08 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 2,905
The victim's insurance company isn't going to like that plan. The more realistic scenario is that after the shooter's liability cap is met, the victim's insurance company will go after the shooter's house and savings. It's sad, but that's personal responsibility.
And the whole "glad to be alive" thing still sticks in my craw. In fact, it's almost the textbook definition of chutzpah. Without painting a specific scenario, it's possible that the victim is still alive not because of the shooter's actions, but in spite of the shooter's actions. It's like telling the victim of a drunk driver "relax - you should just be glad to be alive!"
|July 26, 2010, 12:21 AM
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 8,702
[2] Those legitimate expenses, as described earlier, will may very well include substantial hard, economic damages beyond just medical costs.
[3] If you sue someone for negligence, you may be able to get compensated for the damages he caused you to suffer. You will not get rich, and you will not be rewarded beyond the losses the jury believes you have suffered.
I do certainly believe that ordinary folks have a right to have guns and to defend themselves and their families. That's why I have guns. That's why I've trained with a number of the major instructors in the use of my gun, and that's why I practice regularly. Certainly it's been demonstrated repeatedly that a gun in the hands of a private citizen can effectively be used to prevent a violent criminal act.
But on the other hand, I'm sometimes shocked at the expressions of irresponsibility I've seen on various gun forums over the years. Some folks seem to think that training and practice are unimportant. Some folks complain bitterly about being expected in some States to demonstrate basic proficiency and knowledge of the law of the use of force as a condition of carrying a gun in public.
It would be nice if we could have confidence that all of those of our fellow citizens who go about in public armed for their protection were equally serous about comporting themselves in a manner consistent with an appropriately high standard of care. But it looks like that would be expecting too much.
[2] Fewer and fewer employers in this economy are making coverages like long term or short term disability, or other types of income replacement, available. In fact these types of benefits have generally been provided by only larger employers. Small employers, which actually give jobs to a very high percentage of our work force, usually have not provided any meaningful income replacement insurance benefits.
[3] Governmental programs, like Medicaid, will require an applicant meet an indigency test. So if you have any assets, savings for your retirement, equity in a home, etc., you will have to shed them before you become eligible for government assistance.
[4] As mentioned earlier, some of the types of damages you might suffer might not be covered by any of your first party insurance coverages.
|July 26, 2010, 01:09 AM
Junior member
Join Date: April 3, 2010
Posts: 1,231
|July 26, 2010, 02:20 AM
Junior member
Join Date: July 11, 2010
Posts: 73
Again, you are basing your argument purely on $$$. 1 in 4 Americans have a credit score under 600 so there 140k in bills will go nicely on their credit report alongside their foreclosure. I dont think most care about paying the bill nowadays.
A more powerful argument is about non-monetary costs such as permanent pain and injury. I have pain in my foot right now not from a gun shot, but just regular walking around all day. A gun shot to my leg would probably hurt until I die in some way shape or form not to mention put a permanent scar on my body that would be truly ugly.
Now lets say a man is about to shoot a 5 year old girl. I then double-tap some rounds into the man. Some of the bullets go through the man, go through the wall and hit John Smith in his foot. John now has a permanent injury to his leg where he limps and has pain.
So this thread is all about seeing who would study the situation and then decide on sueing and who would just automatically sue no matter the scenario. I didnt start this thread to talk about insurance, bills or whatever you are talking about. I just want to see how many people would think first then sue or how many people would just outright sue.
Personally, I would study the situation and carefully consider the scenario before immediately acting. I would not hire an attorney that day or the next day, but think first and then act. Thats what I would do.
|July 26, 2010, 08:03 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: May 27, 2006
Location: Ozarks
Posts: 1,834
usaign, that is a good example. BUT FOR the would be killer's actions, nothing would have happened. John shot in the foot was NOT shot 'but for' the actions of the shooter. It is interesting to me, and frankly not just a little bit disturbing, to see how many folks would look right past that little girl and right past the shooter's act which saved her life, to go find a lawyer so they could ride John to the bank and cash in. It is, sadly, a me generation mind set we are dealing with. Me first, and screw John.
It is also interesting to me how much chest beating goes on when someone posts a thread "what would you do in this situation" etc. The name calling and so forth that happens when one party may suggest being a good witness instead of direct action, depending upon the situation, has closed many a thread. Now look at this thread.
There have been some well reasoned arguments presented to support view points, and there have been some lesser responses. My own viewpoint is that if you would line up a lawyer without even giving a thought to examining the situation you have an internal problem you may want to take a good look at.
"A Liberal is someone who doesn't care what you do, as long as it's mandatory". - Charles Krauthammer
|July 26, 2010, 08:17 AM
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 18,604
It's very easy to posit an idelogical position till you are there and faced with the real consequences of actions.
In a way, I've asked this before. Folks have demanded that someone intervene in an incident to save their family. The good samaritan should take that risk to him or herself and the consequences to their family if they get hurt or killed saving you.
But asked if you would support the good samaritan or his and her family for the rest of their lives - the silence is deafening. Even if you said you would on the Internet - that's worth spit.
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Being an Academic Shooter
Being an Active Shooter
|July 26, 2010, 08:20 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: February 27, 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 392
It has absolutely nothing to do with money. It has everything to do with morality and doing the right thing.
If one of my dogs gets out and bites you, I am going to insist you go to the ER or maybe one of those med-stop places and get checked out and then send me the bill. It was an accident, but it was my dog and you did nothing (I presume) to warrant getting bit. Therefore it is my responsibility to take care of it.
But let's say your dog bites me. You might be down on your lucky and unemployed with no insurance. There is always some sort of "circumstance" surrounding any situation that might prevent you from taking care of a situation your are responsible for. Obviously I can't sue you because my daddy always told me, "You can't do business with people that don't have any money". Well, I could sue you, but it probably wouldn't do me any good.
Its the same thing if you accidentally shoot me. The fact that you stopped a woman from being raped or a child being kidnapped still doesn't heal my wounds. If you can't pay, well then I guess I don't have much of a choice. But if you can pay, either from your personal funds or more likely through your insurance, then you will pay, either voluntarily or by the order of a judge. You pick!
"I don't like repeat offenders, I like dead offenders!" Ted Nugent
|July 26, 2010, 08:32 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: December 23, 2009
Posts: 1,347
I think I'd much rather depend on God to provide for my financial nightmare than some judge who is making a living hell out of someones life for only protecting himself.
|July 26, 2010, 08:40 AM
Senior Member
Join Date: February 27, 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 392
"I don't like repeat offenders, I like dead offenders!" Ted Nugent
|July 26, 2010, 08:50 AM
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 18,604
That's a good point - if you are the moral actor and decide to intervene and accidentally shoot an innocent - your morality should mandate that you help with the damage you caused.
That you are a gun totin' hero doesn't remove that responsibility from you.
So let's ask the OP, if you intervene and shoot a good guy - would you liquidate your assets and downsize to pay the legit expenses of the shot up GG?
Sell your house?
Tell your kid, no fancy college?
No vacation for the family?
So would you? You are responsibile for your rounds. I understand laws that remove liabilty from you for shooting the BG but aren't laws that remove liability from you from shooting a GG, fundamentally selfish and immoral?
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Being an Academic Shooter
Being an Active Shooter
|July 26, 2010, 09:23 AM
Junior member
Join Date: July 11, 2010
Posts: 73
The homeowner's insurance would cover most everything if I accidentally shot another person. Any person who hunts should have at least a million in liability coverage under their homeowner's policy. What you get is an umbrella policy over your current limits. The insurance company is entitled to pay for my defense.
So lets say I accidentally shoot someone else and they die. The homeowners insurance would come in and negotiate a settlement on my behalf. They would probably tender the limits in exchange for a full and final settlement of all claims. The victim's family would not have much choice but to accept the settlement. Lets say they did not accept the settlement then it may take years to litigate with an unknown outcome. The outcome may or may not be favorable. Lets say its favorable then how you going to collect?
So the answer to your question is to have a good insurance policy and company backing you. As for my assets, I dont have that much stuff that I could liquidate. My old car? My 1 year old laptop computer? I dont have a personal jet or Ferrari parked out back. I think you should just be happy that I have insurance to deal with such matters. Many folks who hunt dont have any insurance and so the only thing they can liquidate is the shirts in the closet.
|July 26, 2010, 09:41 AM
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 8,702
Your liability insurer doesn't have any duty to me, as the person you injured. In your policy of liability insurance, your insurer promises you that it will (1) indemnify you against any loss that you become obligated to pay by reason of your legal fault; and (2) defend you against such claims.
Relying on your liability insurance is fine. But in the context of the question you asked, I will need to sue you, or threaten to sue you, to get your liability insurance to kick in.
|July 26, 2010, 09:43 AM
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 18,604
Why should I be happy that you have insurance that only partially covers my damages caused by you being a noncompetent shooter? That's a little bit of attitude.
If you didn't have insurance - the question is whether you feel morally compelled to tie your future financial assets to those of the person you shot?
If you left your current low assets state and had some cash - would you then look them up, find expenses not covered and then kick in.
Can't have it both ways - if you don't expect them to sue - then we expect you to do the max to help your victim.
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Being an Academic Shooter
Being an Active Shooter
|July 26, 2010, 10:05 AM
Junior member
Join Date: July 11, 2010
Posts: 73
"Why should I be happy that you have insurance that only partially covers my damages caused by you being a noncompetent shooter?"
Who said my insurance would not be enough? I am aware of the settlements and awards in these types of cases and believe that it would be enough. I also believe my good samaritan actions would be taken into consideration. For example, if I held up a bank and shot someone then the award would be much higher then if I accidentally shot someone while trying to stop someone from holding up the bank.
Here are a few cases I found off the internet:
Maryland case- Accidental shooting (death) after a night of drinking 1.65 million
Florida settlement- Gunshot wound - muscle, nerve, tissue damage $600k
Illinois settlement- Gunshot wound - left 21 year old male in recovery for 1 year - spinal injury - $425k
Child loses site after hunting accident - 900k settlement
I would say that my insurance would probably be adequate for most cases. I believe my good samaritan actions would be accounted for i.e. it was an accidental shooting to stop a violent crime versus a purposeful or highly negligent act like playing with the pistol after a night of drinking.
Keep in mind, you are assuming the shooter is negligent. You are not negligent until the judge or jury rules that you are negligent. They could easily come back and say the shooter is not negligent.
As for my liability insurance kicking in...you can always file a claim directly with anyone's insurance company. All states have insurance regulations that state they must accept and investigate the claim. I could file a claim against you right now and just make something up. Your insurance company would be obligated by law to accept my claim, investigate the matter and then accept or deny it even if its an obviously bogus claim. Everything the insurer does is heavily regulated and governed by law. They have to respond to every claim presented to them.
Last edited by usaign; July 26, 2010 at 10:33 AM.
|July 26, 2010, 10:35 AM
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 18,604
Keep in mind that if you shoot the wrong person you did something wrong.
Also, shooting to keep someone from robbing a bank is thought not to be the wisest action. You shoot to prevent grievous bodily harm to innocents.
Saving the bank's money is really stupid if you take the risk of shooting an innocent. I might not hold you as responsible if you were saving a life and missed a shot. If it were the case that the bank robber was likely to leave with the cash and you went commando and plugged Granny - I would vote to take your stuff.
But you skirt the moral issue. You dance by saying your insurance is adequate and saying your good intentions would protect you. So you are about being protected by insurance and others for the consequences of your actions. Also, you look to others to give you the moral pass in a trial.
I'm saying - ok - yes, your insurance paid and your clever lawyer managed to get you off by getting the blood lust crowd from the Internet on the jury. But, it's you all alone with your conscience - do you kick in for expenses not covered. Or if you didn't have insurance to cover you (OH, insurance mitigates your common sense not to be a commando), do YOU feel that you need to suffer personal financial sacrifice for your actions?
If you don't get the point about saving lives as the necessary precondition to shoot - you need to rethink this.
I don't recall a Battle Cry - I have Insurance - Fire One!
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens
Being an Academic Shooter
Being an Active Shooter
|July 26, 2010, 10:37 AM
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 8,702
And the $425K paid the 21 year old victim of a gunshot wound was a medical malpractice case. The hospital was sued because the patient developed a bed sore. The $425K had nothing to do with the damages/losses suffered by the victim as a result of the underlying gunshot injury.
[2] And in deciding whether you were at legal fault, the nature, quality and circumstances of your actions will be taken into account. A fair, shorthand definition of "negligence" is, "failure to act with the prudence that a reasonable person would exercise under the same circumstances."
|Thread Tools
|Search this Thread


text:
(See Cover)
Popularity? It is glory's small change.
Victor Hugo
He ranks 96th in Senate seniority, so far down the ladder that he occupies a seat in the very last row of the chamber. He has yet to author a bill or head a subcommittee. In his adopted state, he is so little the master of his party that he was unable last week to persuade a nominating convention to accept his candidates for either Governor or Lieutenant Governor. For all that, Robert Francis Kennedy's pockets are ajingle with the coins of popularityand, Victor Hugo's sneer...
To continue reading: or Log-In

subset: commoncrawl


text:
UPDATE: Three Injured in Danville After BMW Crashes Into Tree
UPDATE: 10:52 a.m.
Danville, VA - Danville Police are investigating after a BMW crashed into a tree on Morris Avenue Sunday morning, injuring the driver and two occupants.
According to Danville Police Captain T. W. Jones, the accident happened Sunday morning around 7:30 a.m. in the 80 block of Morris Avenue.
Police say a 1994 BMW 525i was traveling eastbound on Morris Avenue, when the driver of the car lost control, veering off of the far right of the lane and traveling roughly 50 feet before hitting the base of a tree.
All three occupants of the BMW, including the driver, were transported to the Danville Regional Medical Center for treatment, though their injuries or conditions were not known as of late Sunday morning.
Police charged the driver of the BMW, John J. Jackson, 38, of Danville with driving a vehicle not under control.
The BMW sustained approximately $10,000 in damage, Captain Jones said.
Danville Police continue to investigate. They encourage anyone with information about the incident to call Danville Crimestoppers at (434) 793-0000, or to e-mail tips to firstname.lastname@example.com.
Citizens who contact Crimestoppers by telephone may be eligible for a cash reward of up to $1,000.
Danville, VA - Danville Police confirm to ABC 13 they responded to a single car accident on Ashlawn Drive around 7:30 a.m. Sunday.
Witnesses on the scene tell ABC 13 that there appeared to be injuries, and Danville Police confirm they are currently investigating the accident at a nearby hospital.
There are very few details, including the conditions of the people involved in the accident, to report at this time, as the investigation is continuing.
ABC 13 is in touch with the Danville Police Department and will bring you further updates as we get them.


text:
Ironwood Ridge picked up a milestone win Tuesday night and pulled off an upset to do it.
The Nighthawks beat Scottsdale Notre Dame Prep in five sets. The Saints came into the match as the No. 1 team in the AIA's Division II seedings.
The win was the program's 300th and came in front of a packed house in I-Ridge's volleyball gym.
Ironwood Ridge entered the match with Notre Dame at No. 4 in the seedings and will surely move up after the win. The Saints entered the matchup with I-Ridge 11-0 and having dropped just two sets in those 11 matches.
The Nighthawks haven't lost a nontournament match since a loss to Chandler Hamilton on Sept. 4. They've won 10 in a row and play next on Thursday at Pusch Ridge Christian.


text:
Tell Me About It
Friday, November 10, 2006; 12:00 PM
Carolyn takes your questions and comments about her current advice column and any other questions you might have about the strange train we call life. Her answers may appear online or in an upcoming column.
Appearing every Wednesday and Friday in The Washington Post Style section and in Sunday Source, Tell Me About It offers readers advice based on the experiences of someone who's been there -- really recently. Carolyn Hax is a 30-something ex-repatriated New Englander with a liberal arts degree and a lot of opinions and that's about it, really, when you get right down to it. Oh, and the shoes. A lot of shoes.
Mail can be directed to Carolyn at email@example.com .
Carolyn Hax: Hey everybody. Nick is standing here, pestering me. Any questions for him?
Minneapolis, Minn.: Carolyn --
I am 22 and have, for the past three months, been dating a 36- year-old man. We have known each other for two years (through work) and I am in love. He is everything that I have been looking for, even though my parents/friends are very wary of the situation. He has been married and divorced before and has a six-year-old son (whom I have not met). Am I being too idealistic that this relationship could work? Or is the age difference/life experience difference going to be too much for our relationship?
Carolyn Hax: It's going to be too much.
No, wait! It's going to be fine.
No, wait! You, he, your family and I have no idea what's going to happen.
There. That's it.
All you can do is take great care not to drown out/tune out/forcibly overrule what you're seeing and hearing. E.g., if you're working really hard to get along, if you're not communicating well, if you're dreading visits where the son is present--but telling yourself, "But, all relationships are work ...," then you're forcing optimism where you should instead be doubting the viability of the relationship.
But if you're getting along effortlessly on all complicated fronts, then, enjoy.
For Nick: Is his dog okay? I seem to recall the last time he participated in the chat his dog had a broken leg or some such injury.
Carolyn Hax: Nick: Zuzu is swell, thank you very much, and in full control of my life as usual.
Kansas City: Nick --
You ever going to publish your work. Which character is Carolyn?
Carolyn Hax: Nick: I am working on it now. Send messages attn: Janice Shay and I will forward them to her, so she can take them to her pitch meetings.
Which character is Carolyn? I don't put her in that much because most of the people in the cartoons are there in a negative light.
For Nick: How did you get Carolyn to start on time?!
Carolyn Hax: I'll take that one. He was talking to all my cubemates about his hair and I was fleeing the conversation.
One for Nick: Nick, how did you get the nut up to be an artist? Did you have to overcome feeling like your parents and everyone around you were secretly thinking that you were wasting your intellect, or that you weren't any good, or that you'd never make money... or is that just me?
Carolyn Hax: Nick: I went through all of those things, from various sources and influences. The truth of the matter is that my father always made me feel like I should do whatever I wanted to do, and could do whatever I wanted to do. And so I did.
My mom did sort of feel there were only two professions in the world--I should be a doctor, or I should be a doctor--but once I felt I had something to say and started drawing, no one was more on board than she was.
Carolyn Hax: I would add that, if anything, Nick's dad sees office jobs as a waste of intellect. Very creatively inclined-bordering-on-biased.
Arlington, Va: wait, who's Nick?
Carolyn Hax: Nick does the amazing cartoons with the column. (He also does the first edit on my columns, and helps me read my mail. And he was the first husband.)
NoVa: Yes, I have a question for Nick.
I met this guy with whom I met through a common interest activity and have been only a few times. We went to lunch yet I was assuming the lunch was just lunch as in you pay for yourself as I would if I was eating with my coworkers. But, if he pays does that make the lunch more of a lunch date? I was thinking maybe it's more along the lines of a coffee date, but it was just lunch instead. I realize he could also just of been trying to be nice and pay. But, I would like a guys point of veiw on this.
Carolyn Hax: Nick: I wouldn't assume that. Just based on picking up the tab--I try to pick up the tab with almost anyone. It's a personal hospitality sort of rule. (Go to Crete, you'll see what I mean.)
Carolyn Hax: There we have it. Lunch is on Nick.
For Nick, about dog: What kind of dog is Zuzu?
Aren't dogs wonderful?!
Carolyn Hax: Oh, oh, I know this one! Pit bull. So maybe you're buying lunch after all.
Carolyn Hax: I see none of you asked Nick advice about hair. Good call.
Say goodbye, Nick.
Nick: Ask if any of them want to help paint my house this weekend.
Carolyn: Say goodbye, Nick.
Veteran's Day: Hi Carolyn!
Vet's day is a floating holiday in my office and most people took today off so it's dead quiet and totally wonderful but I find myself so excited about no one being here and it being a beautiful day out and I have a three day weekend ahead that I can't get any work done. Advice? (I've already gone for a long walk and done busy work that involves no thinking.)
Carolyn Hax: Write us a poem. The worse the better. You have about ... 2 hours.
Baby Blues: I have to go back to work in March, after maternity leave beginning last June. I know I should be grateful that my company allows me to take off for so long (mostly unpaid). I really don't want to go back. My husband and I have tried to figure out how we can afford for me to not go back (part time is not offered at my place of employment). However, since my salary is a little bigger than his and my health benefits far exceed his, there seems to be no way for me to NOT go back to work. I feel like once I go, I'm never going to see my baby anymore. Can those working mom's out there please assure me that once I go back to work -- and my baby goes to day care -- that things will eventually feel normal and ok?
Carolyn Hax: Working full-time is preferable for some parents. For some, it's a tough sacrifice but worthwhile on balance. For some, it's hell. Of course you will see your baby, and your baby wont' forget you, and all that stuff--but if you want to be home, think harder and try to stay home, or at least find a part-time alternative. Seriously. You do have obstacles, and if you can't clear them go back to the you'll-be-okay part. But you also have time and choices. Why, for example, can't you apply to other companies for part-time jobs?
If anyone wants to weigh in, have at it, just don't hurt me!!!!!!!
Nick question: If you're the first column editor, which do you say more -- "You might want to tone it down a touch" or "Quit pulling your punches"
Carolyn Hax: Nick: First thing I say is, "No, Carolyn, I'm right."
It's probably an 80-20 split, stop pulling punches vs. tone it down.
Carolyn: Bye, Nick.
Nick: Bye. Thank you very much.
Carolyn Hax: Nick has left the building.
Thanks, guys. That was fun.
Boston, Mass.: Hi Carolyn. What's your advice about getting involved with a 34-year- old man, separated for more than a year from his wife of 12 years (notably not yet divorced), with a five-year-old daughter? I'm 32, single/never married, verrrrry hesitant, but I do like him.
Carolyn Hax: Not knowing any of the details, I would heed your verrrrrry-hesitance. There are definitely steep variations in these situations--from people who still might work things out, to people who are just waiting it out till the legal process makes it official, and everything in between--and so it's not a blanket "Go for it" or "Don't you dare go for it." But if you either don't know the details well enough to depend on them or if you know but aren't convinced, those both override any other concerns.
Internet etiquette: Carolyn,
Serious question here.
When someone is so mean and rude in Internet chat boards (whether online/in public or expressed offline in e-mails to a fellow member where they state all sorts of inflammatory things), do you think this is par for the course -- "any one of us could be a jerk, and it's anonymous so why not", or, do you think it's another indicator of character: similar to being mean to waiters, kids, animals, etc.
Carolyn Hax: I don't see any difference between the two. We all get ample opportunities to act like jerks and "get away with it." Some people choose to take those opportunities, and some don't, and those choices speak directly to character. The where-and-when details don't really matter.
As you may have figured out by the " ", I don't believe anyone truly gets away with being rude. Do you ever really feel better when you treat someone else like [shneesh]?
Today's advice: Seriously, did that guy really need to write into an advice columnist to figure out what to do when someone says "promise you won't ever hurt me"? Really? Should this guy even be in a relationship? Has he never heard this before? Dude, here's what you do when someone says "promise you won't ever hurt me": You say: "of course sweet muffin, I would never hurt you, now please let me go to sleep." Lawdy, has he lived in a cave for his entire life?
Carolyn Hax: I am SO glad he didn't go the yes dear/sweet-muffin route. Totally corrosive way to deal with someone you (are supposed to) care about.
Silver Spring, Md.: If you want to stay home that badly with your baby you should. Alternatively, you could say you will try going back to your job for just a month (looking for part time options during that time) and see how it goes. Once you try it you may end up liking it. Remember, not everyone wants to be a full-time parent. I very much wanted to go back to work shortly after I had my baby, but if you don't want that, very seriously look at your options.
Carolyn Hax: Thanks.
Huntsville: Two spouses: One makes big sacrifices for other's career, moving across the country, working two jobs while other spouse gets MBA, etc. How much does the spouse who now has the MBA owe the spouse who did the two jobs? If the spouse who got the MBA now says, "I don't want a stressful job, I just want to take an easy job at a nonprofit that doesn't pay much," is the spouse who sacrificed justified in being upset and urging the spouse with the MBA to get a job that pays better?
Carolyn Hax: Excellent, excellent question, thank you.
I think the entire answer rides on the attitude of the MBA holder. If, on the one hand, s/he has had a genuine epiphany that business isn't a true calling and that a particular nonprofit is, then I think the two of them jointly work out an arrangement that allows pursuit of The Calling while also alleviating pressure on the two-job spouse--with the MBA acknowledging, appreciating, and even regretting/grieving the spouse's sacrifice. And if an arrangement just can't be made to please both, then the MBA does assume the greater burden with the understanding that any bigger-salary yields will be stashed away as a future liberation-from-the-business-world fund.
If the MBA is just saying, "Well, that was fun, but I could really use a nap," then spouse is fully justified both in being upset and in urging a job that eases the household financial pressure.
Re: Today's Column: Did you have to be so harsh on the "Please don't hurt me" girl? Sometimes people get hurt badly in previous relationships and really WANT to trust that the person they're with won't hurt them but they want reassurance. Would your answer change if you knew how long they'd been dating? If she says it after a few dates then yes she's needy and horribly insecure, but what if she says it after six months?
Carolyn Hax: I still have a real problem with it, for all the reasons I gave. I can see, "Be patient with me, please," but, "Be nice to me" crosses a line.
For Baby Blues: Have you and your husband considered him staying home? This might make it easier for you -- no day care to take baby to which shortens your day -- the baby gets to be at home -- some days maybe your husband and baby could come have lunch with you. This might make it easier for you.
Carolyn Hax: Thanks. I actually thought of this and didn't bother mentioning it b/c I figured she wanted to be home, period. But I shouldn't figure. It's a nice solution when the ideal one isn't an option.
Washington, D.C.: How would you define the difference between "relationships are work" and "this relationship doesn't work"?
Carolyn Hax: Loving your job, or not.
Arlington, Va.: Hi Carolyn,
I just got engaged. I'm thrilled about, family and friends all love the guy. But my best friend, who is unhappily single, has already stated that she will be really upset when I get engaged because it will mean the end of our friendship, I won't have any more time for her, blah, blah, blah. I want to tell her about my engagement (I want her in the wedding) but I am really worried that she will be mean and I will blow up or feel really terrible. I don't think it's a lot to ask that she fake happiness for a few moments. How do I approach telling her so that I can accept whatever she does?
Carolyn Hax: Tell her as you would anyone else. She's your friend, not your interim amusement while you await marriage, and if she's going to have idiotic ideas to the contrary, you're under no obligation to validate them by tiptoeing around her.
Will your friendship change some? Of course. You'll have a life partner, in your own home. if it doesn't change you'll owe your husband an apology. But that's life, not a personal insult. People wed, move, change, make other friends, die. It's sad, but it's not personal, and it's not the end of the world. All of which you can use to respond to her when she freaks out at your news. Or shorten it to: "I'm your friend. Please be happy for me."
Baby Blues again: Why isn't it "ideal" for her husband to stay home? Is it "ideal" for her to quit her job just because at this moment, facing the unknown of returning to work for the first time ever since meeting the love of her life (her baby, I mean), she doesn't want to?
Carolyn Hax: It isn't "ideal" because the husband isn't dreaming of staying home and desperately running through the numbers to see how he can afford to stay home.
She is. So, it is. I don't think there's really any fine print to scrutinize here.
For Maternity Leave:: I second the call to go back to work and see how it goes. I was reluctant to start day care for my six-month-old (while still on maternity leave from an academic job -- not teaching now, but I still have research to do), but the truth is that it's been fabulous. My time with baby is still wonderful (and 100 percent devoted to her now), and even better, I feel like a human again. The bonus for me is that my baby loves the interaction of day care, loves to smile and yelp and flap and the other babies. But even if that weren't the case, it's been worth it to feel whole and autonomous and smart again -- which makes me, in turn, a better parent to my girl. Try it out!
Carolyn Hax: Thanks. It really is an intensely personal decision, and you raise an important element of it--that the outcome is sometimes a surprise to people who thought they were sure what they wanted.
To far from D.C. (home): Carolyn,
I'm guessing that the woman who asked him not to hurt her was saying a lot more than just that. It may be that she has really really strong feelings for this guy and can't let herself embrace them and become vulnerable unless he knows that's what she is doing. In other words, she's telling him that she's serious here and if he's not, she'd rather know now.
Just another possibility.
Carolyn Hax: Good thought, thanks. It would be interesting to know the context in which she said this.
Re: Arlington: Umm, if you're scared of your friend's reaction when you tell her you got engaged, your friendship was already kind of doomed. There's an unhealthy dynamic there.
Carolyn Hax: Well, there's that, too. Thanks.
Re: Huntsville: Umm, doesn't the supporting spouse kind of just have to suck it up and deal? I mean, why didn't the supporting spouse go out and get the MBA? What was the supporting spouse hoping to get out of the other one's career/education? Unless there was some sort of agreed-upon deal/plan worked out by the pair of them, it's really more of a lesson learned about investing so much in someone else's life path, even when it is a spouse. Plans for happiness and fulfillment change. The supporting spouse needed to acknowledge this risk before becoming a martyr to an undefined cause. The other spouse might simply be burned out and need to regenerate (as it sounds like the supporting spouse needs to do).
I dunno. I just think you can't make sacrifices for other people with the expectation of getting something out of it -- it just leads to disappointment.
Carolyn Hax: I agree with that, but I also think, on the other side, that the sacrificed-for spouse can't make the supporter "suck it up and deal" lightly. That would be incredibly selfish, for the MBA who needs to regenerate to kick back while the two-job spouse, who also needs to regenerate, gets to continue without a break. In other words, yes, you sacrifice not just get something back, but you shouldn't be asked to sacrifice for nothing.
Country/City: Hi Carolyn -- I'm a big fan and I can't seem to muddle through this and thought you may help out.
I grew up in a rural area of New England, most friends and family live in the area. As a kid, I couldn't wait to leave and in general I'm a city person but these are my most important relationships and visiting once or twice a year isn't cutting it. I also want to buy a house and the cost of a one-bedroom here gets me a mansion back home. Add to the mix that I'm single, most people at home are married and I have doubts about meeting someone in a more limited pool
On the one hand (D.C.): Higher salary, better weather (which is important), City life, Not driving/owning a car.
On the other: Family, Friends, saving money by not flying home so much.
Carolyn Hax: How unrealistic am I allowed to get? Steer your career toward something that allows you to be your own boss or telecommute, buy your New England house--a non-mansion, so you can still afford to rent a little place in DC. It could be a 5-year plan, but five years isn't that long.
Or, move back and see if you like it. DC will still be here if you don't.
I would warn against the I'll-meet-someone-here-but-won't-there mind set. All you need is one person, and who knows where that person will turn up.
Baltimore, Md.: Hi Carolyn:
While it certainly takes two to tango I can't help being bothered by the fact that my now girlfriend slept with me on our first night. This opens up all sorts of questions about her past. I am sure you'll say I am a double-standard jerk, and her past is irrelevant, but you know realities, and I could not live with the fact my girlfriend was "easy" and slept around. How can I let this issue go? Not sure how I ask her about it?
Carolyn Hax: Outright, so she knows who she's dealing with.
You slept with her, too. I won't indulge anyone who thinks it's more wrong for a woman to have sex than it is for a man. You are showing no respect for her, for her autonomy, for her worth as a person, for her ownership of her sexuality. I would love it if you could read this and suddenly recognize her for being as full a human being as you are, but, barring that, please tell her you're hung up on this so she can keep company with someone who will--even if it's her own company.
Washington, D.C.: Hi Carolyn --
I'm not sure what to do. My brother (two years older) and I are not that close, and don't talk that much. His wife and I are close, and talk frequently. (Nothing romantic here, I'm gay and she knows that.) Anyway, it seems from my conversations with her that my brother is depressed and, it seems, as a result of that depression is drinking a lot. Like 4 to 5 glasses of wine a night plus a large bottle of vodka a month (seems like a lot to me). Any suggestions on what I can do to help him without that doesn't make it clear that his wife told me? She's tried to get him into counseling, but be refuses. And he gets angry (according to her) when she mentions that he is drinking too much. Even though we're not close, I am worried about him and worried about how he is affecting his kids (aged 13 and 10 -- old enough to know when their dad is drunk).
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Carolyn Hax: Upsetting situation, I'm sorry.
You have her ear, and I think that's actually enough for you to get involved in a productive way. There won't be much anyone can do if your brother refuses to listen, but your sister-in-law will have a better chance of helping him if she gets help herself. Be it Al-Anon or another support group or private counseling with someone trained to handle addictions, effective "training" for spouses of alcoholics is out there in abundance. Urge her to get some, and, if it makes sense, do some homework yourself.
There are programs for the kids, too; you or she can research them through whatever resources you find for the adults.
Re: Baltimore: I would love to hear this guy's explanation for why he slept with her if it was going to bother him that she slept with him.
Carolyn Hax: ?
RE: Baltimore, Md: Uh, hello? Maybe you were just so irresistible that she wanted nothing more than to sleep with you! Maybe it's a compliment!
But if you can't see it that way, she deserves much, MUCH better.
Carolyn Hax: Ha. Well said, thanks.
Washington, D.C.: I'm immensely sad. My boyfriend broke up with me and to cheer myself up some I went to DSW but I couldn't find anything that I even wanted to try on. Not only can I apparently not make a relationship work, I also can't shoe shop. Any words of comfort?
Carolyn Hax: Hang in there--there are other shoe stores in the sea.
Washington, D.C.: One quick comment for the person wanting to move back to New England -- I have been in a similar situation, and tried moving back where my family was. I was happy in some ways, but lonely, because all of my friends there were married. They wanted to get together for 6:00 p.m. dinners and then be home in time to watch "Lost." I had no single friends in the same boat to go out with. So ... eventually I decided that as much as I preferred the other area of the country for quality of life purposes, my number one goal was to meet someone and in my 30s the best way to do that is to be around other single people. So, I moved back to D.C., where I have a bunch of great single friends. I am much less lonely and have a social life. I would just recommend deciding what your Number 1 goal is: meeting someone and getting married, eventually, having a family, being around your family, being in your favorite location. Because you may have to sacrifice one for another for a while, so it's important to understand what is most important.
Carolyn Hax: Well said, thanks.
I also don't think it's just a single-vs-married thing. It's about how you socialize. If you like to be around people, even just the hellos when you get your coffee, then family and cheap real estate might not be enough for you. Non-metro-area-suburban/rural life is very different, very car based, very often isolating.
I should really put a disclaimer on this.
Anyway, it's not true of every place, obviously, but I still think individual temperament is more important. You need to know and respect yours and choose your ... zoning? demographics? population density? accordingly.
Bitter friends: I had a similar experience a while ago. One of my friends and I got engaged at around the same time; a third, who had been dating her boyfriend longer told us right before we got engaged that she was going to be angry if we both got engaged before her. Well, we did, but her manners kicked in and she was gracious when we got engaged.
This girl has also gotten angry at me for not calling and spending hours on the phone anymore, claiming that she doesn't want me as a friend unless I do. (We live 2,000 miles away so we can't get together often.) Well, I did that in college and when I was single; I have a kid now. I'm not "free" except when I'm in my car alone or after my girl's tucked in bed. I've tried calling her when I'm driving, but she gets offended by that -- every call has to be of significant length. And by the time I'm free at night I want to relax and snuggle with my husband before passing out.
I love this girl dearly, but I'm getting very irritated by this. Am I wrong? I just don't want to spend an hour on the phone at 10 p.m. when I could be reading next to my husband.
Carolyn Hax: Did anyone read the Post Magazine piece (maybe about a month back?) about the married woman with kids who resented her unmarried and childless friend for not "getting" her life? I thought it was fascinating because it illustrated that people on both sides can be guilty of closing their minds to lives unlike their own--it's not just the single/childless ones unrealistically pressuring the married/parents.
Anyway, I throw that out there, and yet it does sound like your friend is closing her mind to the realities of your life. (You would be doing the same if you were complaining, "Not all of us have nothing better to do than talk on the phone for an hour," but, yay, you didn't.) Try One More Time--explain that you have nothing left at 10 p.m. so it's not a good time to talk--then apologize for not being able to be a friend on her terms, and let this thing end.
washingtonpost.com: Through Thick and Thin, (Post Magazine, Oct. 8)
Washington, D.C.: Would it be too silly to suggest for the person missing rural New England to try something kind of intermediate -- like moving to Boston? You get closer to the family, and cheaper visits home, but you're still in a city, with all the attendant possibilities.
Carolyn Hax: I don't think there is a too-silly point in this chat.
But, then, weather was an issue for this person, so that might be the end of Boston "Spring Is for Wimps" Massachusetts.
Seattle, Wash.: I'm planning to tell a friend of mine this weekend that I have very strong romantic feelings for him. I've decided this because I cannot take it anymore. About a 50/50 chance (in my best guess) that he'll feel the same. Any tips?
Carolyn Hax: Adjust your figures to 99/1 won't share/will share your feelings, then go for it. In other words, say it because you want to say it and you want him to know it, not because you want him to love you back. That would just be a nice bonus.
This will probably take some intense auto-brainwashing, but at least try.
Alexandria, Va.: My best friend has just announced that she's moving to WI to be closer to her family. She's my only single female friend here in the D.C., area and we keep joking that if we were lesbians we would be "married" with kids. She's made reference to the fact that I'm not tied to this area (OK job but nothing spectacular, no boyfriend) and that I should move with her. On one hand, I'm really tempted: living with my best friend, change of scenery, chance to start all over again with career. But I've also said that moving somewhere to be with someone just to avoid being alone isn't a good reason to move. And that's what I feel I would be doing. But the thought of being alone is terrifying to me. Any way I can weigh these options indiscriminately in my mind?
Carolyn Hax: After she moves there, go, visit the place, see if you get that I-have-to-live-here feeling you've probably gotten on some vacation or something. If it still feels like you'd be moving just out of fear (or if you feel you'd be overly dependent on your friend) then trust it and stay where you are. Remember, you don't have to decide anything now, or even a year from now.
Atlanta, Ga.: I'm single in the big bad city, and all MY friends are married and want to get home early to watch TV, pay the babysitter, etc.
I don't know if it's a city/country thing as a universal getting-older kind of thing.
Carolyn Hax: I'd call it a [bleeping] exhausted kind of thing. But then I'd need another disclaimer.
DSW Failure:: The woman having shoe-shopping failure could go get a new haircut ... more dangerous, but doesn't last as long.
Carolyn Hax: Doesn't last as long, but can't be shoved into the back of the closet and forgotten, either. At least not without painful consequences.
Los Angeles, CA: Carolyn,
In your Nov 3rd column, you had addressed the case where an angry boyfriend who locks his girlfriend out of the house by saying that he is "a person of poor character" and pretty much telling the girlfriend to leave him.
Now, what would you say if the roles were reversed? What if the girlfriend locks out the boyfriend when they fight because she feels threatened by him because he is bigger and stronger.
And let me add that the boyfriend does get loud and angry but has not ever done anything to physically harm her.
To me, it's understandable that the girlfriend may feel this way, but I feel it's still the girlfriend mistreating the boyfriend.
Your thoughts?
Carolyn Hax: Those aren't reversed roles. That would be the woman locking the man out because she couldn't deal with him. And that would make her abusive.
Anyone locking someone out for fear of physical harm gets an immediate pass, unless the idea is so ludicrous that it's clearly a manipulative tactic.
And, anyone who gets into any of these situations and doesn't make changes or end the relationship, but instead goes back for more of the same, is a fine candidate for counseling, regardless of which side of the door he or she finds him- or herself.
Fair nuff?
Weather: This has to be the first time I've ever seen D.C.'s weather be listed as a positive thing.
But I kind of liked the weather when I lived in New England, so what do I know?
Carolyn Hax: DC weather is a plus for 9 of 12 months. New England weather is a plus for ... about 7 of 12.
(This is for people who like seasons, not people who like year-round 75 and sunny. A k a, wimps.)
Boston, Mass.: I need to know rules on calling after hooking up with girls. Went on a first date on Saturday, she spent the night at my place (no sex, but close). Nice enough girl, but I'm really not interested. When should I have called her to tell her?
If I were interested, when should I have called her?
How bad is what I'm doing?
Carolyn Hax: When did you decide you weren't interested? If it was still Saturday, then what you did was pretty bad--you shouldn't have encouraged her (in any way) to spend the night. (If she had then said, "Hey, I don't like you, either, but why let that get in the way," the angels would wink and leave you to it.)
If you were interested, then you'd call later that day to say you had a great time. Leave game-playing for the kids.
Who we are: It seems to me that people transition from single to married with a good approximation of who they were before. My friends are incredibly important to me and always will be. Family means we speak less, but I still make a point of keeping in touch. Those of my friends who, when they got married, stepped off the edge of the earth were the ones who never really had returned phone calls. Life changes, the ebb and flow changes, but the spirit (whatever it was) stays true.
Carolyn Hax: Good point, but also factor in the individual circumstances. A friend in med school or who works 80-hour weeks will be there for you far less than one who works banker's hours; a friend with one easygoing child will be there for you more than the one with a special-needs child or three circus candidates in diapers; a friend with a social or career-absorbed spouse will be out and about more than one who marries a homebody--unless they have kids, when the reverse can be true.
Which can all be said in way fewer words: Base expectations on other's lives, not just your needs.
Dupont, Washington, D.C.: I've been going through a rough patch lately and after weeks of trying to deal with it myself, I opened up to a few friends. They've been great, concerned and all of that. The problem is my issues just aren't going away yet and I can feel myself getting depressing to hang out around. I'm trying not to be and I don't force these deep talks on them whenever we see each other, but I just can't be as carefree as normal.
How do I stop myself from getting to be one of "those" people who no one wants to hang out around? This funk won't last forever, I know that -- I just don't want to be a burden in the meantime.
Carolyn Hax: Sometimes friends can be a comfort just in the distraction they provide from your own crap. Will that work here?
Cleveland Park, Washington, D.C.: I've been with my boyfriend for three years but lately I've been having feelings of wanting more freedom and a chance to be carefree. I'm only 25 and there's a part of me that feels like life is passing me by. However, I do love my boyfriend, so I'm wondering if the feelings I'm having are normal and will subside over time. Should I stick it out and wait for this to pass, or should I take this as a sign that it's time to break things off?
Carolyn Hax: Unless you have a moral obligation to stay where you are, please promise me that you'll never, ever suppress your inner urges to get out and get more out of life. It's regret in a can.
Los Angeles, Calif.: Hi Carolyn,
Love your columns/chat. In a recent article, you said couples should get married when they don't want to/think marriage will change anything about the relationship besides give it that piece of paper that makes it "official." I might be wrong, but I seem to recall you said earlier that you're not a big fan of cohabitation before marriage/engagement. How do you reconcile the two? (I'm not trying to challenge; I just really respect your insight and was wondering how the two go hand in hand.)
Carolyn Hax: I said I wasn't a big fan of cohabitation as an oh-well-whatever alternative to a real commitment. As in, "I'm not sure this is someone I'd marry, so we'll just move in together."
Reason being, SO many people get mired in these mixed-stuff, I'm-on-the-lease, can't-afford-to-leave, thought-we'd-be-married-but-s/he-keeps-saying-s/he's-not-ready swamps--and some even get married knowing they're not in the best relationship because it's too painful to move out. Awful.
So, when people ask about this, I advise moving in together when they would both be okay if living together were an end unto itself--or, alternately, if they are engaged and ready to marry but just want to see how day-to-day life is (if they've lived some distance apart or something). The important thing is that the couple be like-minded and thinking long-term.
Arlington, Va.: "Leave game-playing for the kids."
Oh, but Carolyn, you of all people should know that dating involves lots and lots of game-playing, whether we know it or not AND whether we like it or not.
That's why I hate dating, because I can't stand the inevitable game-playing that comes with it.
Carolyn Hax: NO NO NO. You can refuse to play. Really. It might not always "work," but it will always work in the sense that you're not playing games.
Failed Shoe Shopper: Try shopping for purses. If you like one, you can just buy it without worrying if it will pinch your toes ...
Carolyn Hax: There's some ingenuity.
Holy 2:41. Bye, seeya, thanks, type to you next week ...
RE: Carefree: That's good advice, unless she has a history of ending relationships every time she gets bored. I had a friend like this in college, who didn't seem to understand that every once in a while you'd go through a patch where your S.O. just didn't totally enthrall you.
Trouble with that is that she would break up with them only to realize very quickly thereafter that the problem was really that she was stressed about work or something, then she had two problems ...
Carolyn Hax: Still means she needs to grow up, and so isn't ready to be in committed relationship. Right?
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.


text:
First off letting the user type in the date string can be problematic. Hence, I believe you're better off using a date control. However, users being users, want want want. So if they want to type in the date on the exit event of the text box use the function ISDATE.
It'll be on them to enter the MM/DD/YY correctly.


text:
After a quick trip to TD Garden and North Station, the first stop of the NESN Back in Black and Gold Tour was Providence, Rhode Island. The crew hit up 94 HJY in Providence for a radio interview before jetting over to Hasbro Children's hospital.
A trip to COX Cable and the Warwick mall were also in the cards.
See the highlights in the video above.
Powered by WordPress.com VIP


text:
A classic. Rock & Roll, Country, Gospel, Americana… music for all generations.
Music to inspire and cheer up the heart with rockstar drums that leaves you no choice but to dance to the beat, an incredible lineup of unique and talented musicians, awesome lyrics and songs that tell a story of life as it is, and a character unique to the times in Music that will make you smile and say "fck, yeah!", somebody had to do it!"
Somebody had to do it and SATCHEL did. A musical vision manifested with pure conviction, intention, passion and confident delivery.
In a time when Music is emerging from the survival of a transition that technology, "computer made" music, fake lip-sync pop and gangster rapping rage imposed on our music market, it is refreshing to hear a live feel creation, an album produced with the creativity of an artist that understands the power of sound as is.
SATCHEL, composer and musician in this Album, has produced a gem that will remind you of the American good ol' times and surprise you song after song with his progressive performance that spices up youth. You are going to love THE BROKEN EVERLYS. This is an album to listen from beginning to end, no song is alike, it is like traveling through time. Listen to it! Available at CD BABY, this a CD that You can't miss in you collection of music.
Congratulations !!!!!!! We will catch you on the flip 🙂
To keep up with THE BROKEN EVERLYS concerts, events, and CD releases visit:


text:
Hans Zimmer composes instrumental to raise money for Colorado shootings
Academy Award winning composer Hans Zimmer, who scored The Dark Knight Rises, is using his musical talent to raise money for casualties of the Aurora, Col. shooting rampage. Zimmer composed an 8 1/2 minute instrumental titled Aurora, available on iTunes for $1.29, with all proceeds going to the city's victim relief fund.
A midnight showing of The Dark Knight Rises was the setting where James Holmes allegedly killed 12 people, injuring 58 others.
"I recorded this song in London in the days following the tragedy as a heartfelt tribute to the victims and their families," Zimmer posted on his Facebook page.
Aurora features an ethereal choir chanting over somber electronic chords; a formless yet soothing New Age dirge. The song was ranked 48th among iTunes downloads Friday. Aurora can also be heard on numerous free sites including YouTube but that would defeat Zimmer's worthwhile purpose, wouldn't it?
-- Steve Persall, firstname.lastname@example.com
[Photo: Getty Images]


text:
The leaders of the editorial Board of RBC leaving the holding
The RBC holding, sent out a press release according to which his leave three executives: editor-in-chief Elizaveta Osetinskaya, her Deputy Roman badanin and chief editor of RBC novel Solus. Today is their last working day.
photo: youtube.com
According to sources of the Newspaper.<url>" the decision was taken after a meeting on personnel issues, held in the holding at 14.00. At 16.30 a meeting of the editorial staff.
We will remind that earlier RNS said that compared with other members of RBC management, in particular, against the General Director of holding Nikolay molibog, being tested in connection with a fraud case against a former shareholder of one of the subsidiaries of the holding company Alexander Panov.
It Molibog today commented on the dismissal of the creative management of the holding, explaining that it "could not come to a consensus on important issues."
Read about the relationship Prokhorov and RBC.
Before that, in mid-April, in the group ONEXIM Mikhail Prokhorov were searched, experts are also associated with pressure on RBC owned by Prokhorov.
Also, the media widely circulated rumors that the Russian authorities are dissatisfied with the editorial policy of the holding company that published the investigation about the family of Vladimir Putin and the corrupt ties of the top management of Russia.
Recall that in the RBC holding, went to work a significant part eliminated at the end of 2013, the Agency RIA "Novosti", who refused to work in the new structure of the MIA "Russia today" under the leadership of Dmitry Kiselyov. Recently, RBC has held lidirujuschie position in the market of Internet media in Russia.Related posts: