Schadrach

Or in Tennessee where getting a minor trans healthcare without their parents knowledge and consent means said parents can sue you.

Still amazed that SCOTUS gave an opinion that literally permits POTUS to have them executed.

They only have the gall to do that because they believe Biden won’t abuse it and Trump will win.

Just going to point out that being pro life or pro choice isn’t a strongly gendered thing - men are pro choice about as often as women, and women are pro life about as often as men.

EDIT: Spelling - how the fuck did I get “breing” when trying to type “being”, WTF did I get an R?

As opposed to everyone else, who hope dearly that the 25th will be invoked if he’s elected. Though I doubt anyone wanted the first woman president to get the job without being elected, it will warm my heart if Hillary Clinton is alive to see the first woman president and it isn’t a Clinton.

I guarantee you they don’t think that way now.

I actually know someone something similar happened to and even years later half the house was basically a shrine to the kid.

Sure, sure, but not every gun owner leaves their gun loaded and unsecured in a car with their unsupervised young child.

I mean her case was investigated and he was freed to leave the country afterward. It didn’t come back with a vengeance until it could be used as a means to put him where the US could get at him.

The FBI is literally the federal equivalent to state police. So anything that violates federal rather than state law or involves a crime crossing state lines.

The FBI and DHS are federal police.

You know he considered investing in Action Park but decided the vision for the park was too risky, right?

Like that place was such a horrifying deathtrap that Trump’s conscience kept him from getting in on it. That’s a fucking low bar.

The best part of that line is that everyone left of fascism reads it as a direct threat - bow to our will or there will be blood, while the right can claim it’s just them worrying about the left turning violent.

I used to argue that whoever was ultimately responsible for safety at a chemical plant should be required to have them and their family live close enough that if shot goes wrong, they’ll definitely be among the worst effected.

But then I live within the greater Charleston, WV area, and there’s a plant in a town called Institute here that makes and handles MIC, most notoriously known for being made less poisonous for use as pesticide and being the stuff that leaked and caused the Bhopal incident back when.

…and let’s be fair, it’s an ad so the corpo bullshit is mandatory.

There’s also the one about bearing false witness, aka perjury/defamation/libel/slander.

What it says, the firstborn of every womb belongs to God and should be sacrificed to him, but you can trade a lamb if you want to keep the firstborn, like a coupon.

So hypothetically, you either sacrifice a lamb to God or kill your first born child - this mirrors nicely with Passover.

If they actually believe in that whole originalism thing they claim (basically that the text of the constitution means what it would have meant at the time it was written, and shifts in the definition of words don’t change that meaning) they still can’t allow it. There’s basically no way to interpret the Constitution that would result in mandating a specific religious affirmation be in public facilities isn’t “promoting an establishment of religion”.

The best they could hope for without just ignoring the Constitution entirely and making something up (which all their conservatism.aside they generally haven’t done yet) would be arguing that this requires opening the door to any similar list of religious tenets by literally every faith on the planet.

The law specifies the exact text, so this won’t fly. Even using the other set of ten commandments in the Bible won’t fly.

I am looking forward to the lawsuits on 1A and how this functionally means they will have to display any list of religious rules or tenets requested. Nine Satanic Statements, the Seven Tenets of The Satanic Temple, the Noble Eightfold Path, etc, etc. We can turn their schools into a museum of comparative religion.

No, it doesn’t. That’s what I’m getting at. Look at how they define a machine gun in the act. It requires that the gun fire more than once per operation of the trigger (this is also what it means for a firearm to be automatic). A bump stock facilitates operating the trigger again more quickly, but does not fire more then once per operation of the trigger.

You’re not looking at the definition used in the law but deciding that anything that lets you shoot faster counts.

All they are a modification to turn a semiautomatic gun into a full automatic weapon.

They don’t though. And I went into great detail as to what exactly they do and how it works to explain why they don’t do that.

An automatic weapon fires more than once per operation of the trigger by definition. Any gun that fires once per operation of the trigger is not automatic by definition.

A bump stock doesn’t change that, it makes it easier and more accurate to bump.fire, which is basically using the recoil to bounce your finger off the trigger and back onto it to pull it faster than you otherwise would.

With practice you can bump fire with a regular stock, that doesn’t mean all semiautomatic weapons are actually automatic.

Like the binary trigger thing - eventually that will be challenged in the courts and the argument won’t be over whether or not the words binary trigger are in the law, but whether or not lifting your finger off the trigger counts as a second operation of the trigger or as part of the previous one because that is what would determine if it fires one or two shots per operation of the trigger and thus whether or not it’s legally automatic and whether or not it is controlled as an automatic weapon.

The law doesn’t say what you wish it said, and it isn’t exactly vague.