My quarterly goals are meant to be

• Specific
• Goal oriented

And specifically should not be

• Vague
• Passive

Looking at recent decisions, it's going to go badly for those of us who believe in the anti-establishment clause.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Congress shall make no law, this actually could be interpreted quite literally by the courts that it is perfectly acceptable for a state to not only establish a religion but to criminalize other beliefs.

I think this would be a 5-4 decision with SCOTUS. I think Barrett would be against it, because she is Catholic and would see that her beliefs may not be the ones promoted. Kavanaugh and Roberts could be a toss up.

I started keeping a list of companies that cold call me, it will take a lot for me to ever do business with any of them.

The worse are the lead gen companies. Those assholes call me multiple times a day even after I tell them not to call and report them.

caused “substantial harm to television program copyright owners,_

Maybe? People willing to copy and distribute this content will always be around and you will never catch them all. People willing to pay a discount or seek not and find said content will always be around. And there will be those who will watch a show or a movie because it is freely available, who would never pay a dime for it.

They will never end piracy and I'd argue it might actually be bad for business if they did.

I wonder how mass deportations would actually work. To me it sounds like seeking out undocumented or potentially undocumented people and detaining them until they are deported or can prove a legal status. It sounds like rounding people up based on some sort of identifying factor. How many people will get detained who shouldn't be?

The idea that either event would be featured in a textbook below a university political science course is a bit of a dream anyway.

But I can only imagine the exam confusion.

Excuse me sir is this about 1968 or 2024?

Far left to far right it's all a scam. You'll see people slam a policy and still come up with a reason to vote for that policy. Almost all raise money from the same corporate interests.

This only gets better with major election finance reform and ethics reform with teeth.

I haven't looked them up, but I'm guessing most who voted for it are in purple districts and trying to keep their seats.

But fuck that bill. Their anti-woke war is going to cause a talent drain across the federal government. If my family was living on a base in a state without reproductive protections I'd be looking for a transfer or a new job.

CDC released the statement on Wednesday and it looks like the AG likely made this public on Thursday, or that's at least when arraignments were.

Can we get a statue of a diapered 45 standing on a platform held up by the working class surrounded by the likes of people like Mike Johnson and bitch McConnell bending a knee to the fool.

While I see your point, I fear that even in the context of a museum they would become targets of pilgrimage for people who missed the glory days.

Isn't it that the trigger is squeezed once and the recoil causes the crock to bounce back which results in another trigger action? Even though there is only one action by the shooter, it would seem to be multiple trigger actions.

They don't need to ban specific parts, and in fact they shouldn't. They could ban anything designed to accelerate rate of fire.

That's exactly what they should do. But SCOTUS seems to think that the bump stock cannot be banned because there is no law about bump stocks specifically.

The ban on bump stocks was implemented using the Firearms' Owners Protection Act of 1986. Which was signed into law by Reagan (funny how a failed assassination will change things).

The text at issue is

SEC. 109. AMENDMENT OF NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT. (a) Section 58450)) of the National Firearms Act (26 U.S.C. 5845(b)) is amended by striking out "any combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun," and inserting in lieu thereof "any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun,"

IMO the majority in this decision is choosing to blatantly ignore the text of the act which was clearly chosen to future-proof for any advancement which would result in an effortless high rate of fire such as bump stock and super safety. Instead they are insisting that Congress must amend the law to include specific parts which of course is a losing battle as there will always be a new part that achieves an effortless high rate of fire.

Now where one could argue that this ruling is correct is the accepted definition of a machinegun requires a single trigger action.

26 U.S.C. § 5845(b)

Any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger

Personally I think the laws should be amended to define weapons and munitions by their result (high or continuous rate of fire) instead of their form or function. As it stands, someone could create a weapon that simply fires continuously but does not resemble a gun in any other way. Would such a weapon be a machinegun if it doesn't even have a trigger?

I think the dissenting opinion was more inline with the intent of FOPA.

I hate you.

I just want as time where election results were respected and transfer of power came without violence.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-think-tank-lawsuit-election-officials-refuse-certify-results-1235032235/

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/19/trump-campaign-election-monitoring-00153217

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-rnc-vote-monitor-election-integrity-rcna148557

They will delay certification of results where they can. They will do everything to steal this election.

https://youtu.be/vmE5f2jD3F8?si=-d9VgVSJ5hyC6Mpg

While the cop is outside after hitting update on the app.

IMO we need to stop humanizing robots. There is no reason for a robot to be human in form. Form should match function. Furthermore, a humanoid robots elicit feelings from people that are not helpful or healthy. There are people who might advise abuse a robot because it isn't an actual person, it doesn't mean that their abuse is less mentally ill. They should be viewed as a machine and treated as such, no better than a car.

Good ole Chode

Not saying it's justified to bully anyone, but maybe the fruit has rotted with the tree.

A more hopeful part of me believes that she's been saddled with a toxic family and has suffered for it. And now she'll be able to escape and be free.