OshaqHennessey

joined 3 weeks ago
[–] OshaqHennessey@midwest.social 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It's definitely a G-force thing. If I remember correctly from Mythbusters, the human limit is about 10 Gs before losing consciousness, 15 Gs before suffering internal organ damage, and about 20 Gs before instant death.

That is a disappointingly low number

[–] OshaqHennessey@midwest.social 2 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

Why not just say, "He wanted to make sure the window was closed."?

To reword the OP, "All my good faith had no effect on the outcome."

To reword the title, "I hate when that happens."

Agreed, almost every time this happens, I think someone's just being lazy or intentional. As a matter of personal preference, I reword sentences to exclude the word "that" altogether whenever possible, so the idea of two consecutive "that"s being unavoidable severly strains my credulity.

[–] OshaqHennessey@midwest.social 0 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Correct. To my knowledge, there is no legal way to possess a suppressor or high capacity magazine in California, under their current laws. In (almost) all other states, high capacity magazines are not regulated, and suppressors can be legally obtained with a $200 tax stamp and NFA form.

I'm not from California, so I'm not as familiar with their laws, but I find the idea of an easy loophole to suppressor ownership very difficult to believe.

[–] OshaqHennessey@midwest.social 2 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

So, you want to take away rights from all people, even those who have demonstrated an ability to safely and responsibly own firearms, because a very small minority of people abused those same rights? Why should I be punished because someone else broke the law? How is that not a violation of my sixth ammendment right to due process?

If I were interested in being snarky, this is where I would tell you to think like an adult, not a tyrant.

[–] OshaqHennessey@midwest.social 0 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

Some of us live in rural areas and use guns almost daily to defend crops and livestock from pests and predators. How should those people "adjust"?

[–] OshaqHennessey@midwest.social -1 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

You must be confusing a CCW (Concealed Carry of a Weapon) permit with an FFL (Federal Firearms License).

A CCW is obtainable by almost anyone who is over 21 and not a convicted felon, and allows you carry a concealed weapon, such as a handgun or a knife with a blade longer than 3 inches.

An FFL is obtainable by business-owners who pass extensive background checks with the ATF and allows them to legally sell firearms to other people.

A CCW can be obtained over a weekend or two. An FFL takes months of paperwork, interviews, background checks, and filing fees.

If you don't believe me, please go try and obtain an FFL. I'd be very interested to learn how far you get.

Oh ok, I get it now. I like it.

[–] OshaqHennessey@midwest.social 0 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I'm not certain if you're referring to the border with Mexico or the rest of the US, but if a weapon is banned in California, it's also banned to import one into California from another US state.

Setting up checkpoints and checking every car coming in for weapons would be a violation of every citizens' right to travel, and fourth ammendment right against unreasonable searches.

So, how do you propose to implement "better birder control" without violating the rights of citizens who have committed crime?

[–] OshaqHennessey@midwest.social 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Your suggestion, if implemented, would result in only the wealthy having a right to self preservation. Are you certain it would be a good idea to consolidate even more power into their hands and further entrench their monopoly on violence?

[–] OshaqHennessey@midwest.social 6 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

It's an intentional choice, but it's not for style. The EPA passed regulations in the 90s that demanded a certain level of efficiency from all manufacturers. Sounds great in theory, but the execution was very flawed. The problem is, the regulations allow for less efficiency, based on the size and weight of the vehicle. Well, it's much easier to engineer a big, heavy vehicle than it is to engineer a more efficient vehicle, so which option do you think most American car companies chose? That amount of bulk allows them to have a lower rated MPG while still remaining "compliant."

[–] OshaqHennessey@midwest.social 3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I think the art lies in the contradiction in this case. My interpretation is the artist feels like the painting on the inside while pretending to be the title, or the label on the outside.

view more: ‹ prev next ›