Skip Navigation

Posts
47
Comments
502
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Who are you to say, peon, that the POTUS cannot dissolve the SCOTUS?

    Just your average joe who is able to read a few paragraphs. The federal government doesn't have any power not explicitly granted to them.

    What I was trying to say is that Biden should call the bluff, and force the SCOTUS to decide right now.

    It not a bluff it's an important case. They should write an actually well founded opinion that doesn't set up terrible case law for future generations.

    Why not? If the POTUS really does have absolute immunity, why not? Do you see the insanity this road leads down?

    You're operating under the presuppositions that it does have absolute immunity and I don't believe he does. As I said, the case hasn't had an opinion. And I didn't mention it previously but the state judge thing you'd mentioned earlier is also not in the power of the president.

    https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/

    Article 2 is the bit to read.

  • There hasn't been an opinion dropped on Trump V. US yet. The arguments were only just over a month ago.

  • This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the fundamentals of US governance. The President can't dissolve SCOTUS. He hasn't been granted that power.

  • Ceding ground only results in losing what we have.

  • Most sentences are absurdly long today. Too many things that would have been a citation 200 years ago are felonies today.

  • Tldr: Don't do this unless you have a business that requires a steam account for tax purposes. It doesn't need to be successful but it does need to be real.

    Trusts are probably a better option for this sort of thing than a LLC.

  • There just commenting on restrictions against personal activities in official uniforms. I've had jobs that have had very restrictive uniform policies that basically restricted to coming from or going to work-home. Or even you're only allowed to be in uniform 30 minutes before or after a shift.

    Beyond limiting wear on uniforms organizations general don't want to be associated with what every employer does in their free time. And they do this with broad policies that may even prevent things they would want, like wearing one at a LGBT rally.

  • It's not uncommon to point 'off target' in a way that is undetectable from the camera angle. Kind of like how none of the people in the action movies actually get punched.

  • Completely different scenarios. In yours the person hurts themselves. In this case Baldwin hurt someone else, allegedly due to his own negligence.

    Closer to: Worker drives forklift around blindfolded. Hits someone killing them. It's both the managers fault and blindfold guy.

  • Unless the judge has some knowledge that Baldwin either had intent, or was negligent in such a way as to contribute to the death,

    Trials are the thing we do that allow juries/judges to come to those conclusions.

  • Fault is percentage based on the US. The employer and employer can be civilly liable for damages. But this is a criminal trial.

    If this was a trucker who refused to check his blind spot routineoy before merging and killed someone the trucker would be held to account.

  • Trichinosis from bear isn't much harder to get than salmonella from chicken.

  • Yes trichinosis can be avoided like salmonella by ensuring a meat is raised to a safe temp.

  • In practical (non legal) terms possibly if it was an actual private party and not a licensed dealer.

    Alien is definitely a unique way of putting it. I guess it makes sense in that they are "alien to the nation". But If I were to ever be forced to move to a different country I'd probably go by ex-pat.

    Although I'd say we have more of a culture (increasingly so) of acknowledging immigrants as Americans first. Probably due to the whole melting pot thing. My view of it is anyone who immigrate to the US is an American. But if I moved to another country, like Japan, I don't think they'd consider me Japanese.

    Also that reminds me alien ≠ immigrant. Aliens would be people in the country either temporarily or illegally. Someone who got a green card by marrying an American wouldn't be an alien for example. If you do the whole immigration thing you're just an American not an alien.

  • Yes. Its called effective firing range.

    The Uvalde school shooting occurred in a school.

    Not particularly long looking hallways.

    Besides the department had the choice to make the situation pistol vs rifle (to use your paradigm) instead they left it unarmed vs rifle.

  • Pistols don't beat AR15 rifles. If the opponent outguns you, you need to wait for backup and bigger guns. Basic tactics.

    This doctrine has been out of standard practice for over two decades. In response to Columbine the new mass adopted doctrine is go towards the gun fire. This is information any officer who has joined in the past ~25 years would have been taught.

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/us/florida-school-shooting-columbine-lessons/index.html