I mod a worryingly growing list of communities. Ask away if you have any questions or issues with any of the communities.
I also run the hobby and nerd interest website scratch-that.org.
It gets me thinking. Tech literate people are the types to install blockers, and would be the same type of people both motivated and knowledgeable about how to switch browsers. On the line of thinking it seems like it is just going to drive them away from Chrome. Tech illiterate people remain unaffected since they are getting ads anyway.
But then on the other hand, if someone is tech literate then why are they even still using Chrome? Does such a person value whatever advantage Chrome theoretically provides over their ad-blocking?
and the whole hooters/twin peaks concept
I haven’t thought about Hooters in years. It always did seem like a dated concept from the 1980s that was somehow still clinging to life in the 90s. It’s still in business, so obviously somebody must be going to them, but I don’t know if I’d call it normal for most Americans.
Anecdotally this is also my experience. I grew up with shoes off in the house, but even up to the early 00’s it seemed to be a cultural outlier in the US.
These days I think the majority of people who I go over to visit have a shoes off rule. Seems like the split is between the older half of millennials and up shoes on, and younger half and down shoes off for the most part.
If a business has a sign posted stating “no guns allowed,” you can still legally carry your weapon in that business.
I’m sure that’s the practicality, but I am skeptical of the legality of a CCW permit trumping the rights of the property owner.
It sounds more like breaking the law and just not getting caught. Do you have any links to CCW permit overriding property owner rights?
#8: Police
State police enforce state level laws, and Federal agencies enforce federal laws.
The whole semi-autonomous thing. If a state and the Feds both have their own laws against something they could each try to arrest somebody, but there could also be a situation where one might not have a law while the other one does. For example , weed is still illegal under Federal law. The Federal government has mostly chosen not to enforce these laws, but it could. Many states have legalized weed to varying degrees.
So there could be a situation where somebody is smoking weed in a state that has legalized it. The state police have no power to arrest that person, but the Feds do.
I’m sure this has all made it more confusing.
In the US with all the variety there are places like that, but then places where you seemingly can’t find liquor to buy and take home anywhere.
There’s differences between how wine & beer, and hard liquor are treated. I’d say the “average” experience is beer in any corner shop or gas station, beer and wine in a grocery store, and hard liquor in specific liquor stores.
Alcohol sales vary hugely between states. In some states, you can get hard liquor at Wal-Mart while in others you can only get it at state run stores.
The rules about licensing mean some areas gas stations usually don’t even sell beer, while in other places they have giant walk in beer freezers.
Some states or counties have dry laws where they don’t sell alcohol on Sundays, or maybe no hard alcohol, or maybe you have to wait until noon to be able to buy it.
It’s all over the place.
As for the Wal-Mart machineguns, I think you’ve gotten enough replies on that detail, but again gun sales are something with huge variety. Some states have put restrictions in place where a Wal-Mart theoretically could still sell guns but doesn’t because of the hassle, and gun stores end up being few and far between, while other places basically just have the Federal minimum in place.
And if he has a permit but is printing then it can also land him with some penalties.
I can’t find anything in a quick search the specifies printing as being illegal. In fact, a quick search brings up the opposite, that printing is not a legal definition and the discussion around it by laypersons often becomes muddled with confusion between printing and brandishing.
States will vary, but did you have a particular one in mind regarding the specifics of printing? Some of the search results I get mention some anti-printing laws but none I find get more specific than that.
But he di’d bring a bomb
I’ve been off Reddit for a couple of years, but that’s still sad news. That was a legitimately good community, and the name flip was good, and I think they were partnered with worldpolitics which was the flipside community.
My interpretation of the passage was that, upon racking the slide, you’d have a trigger pull weight between the two.
Your interpretation is simultaneously correct. If you insert a magazine on a closed Glock and pull the trigger nothing will happen. You need to rack it once to get the first round into the chamber. When you fire that racked round, you get the intermediate trigger pull- but also any other round you fire has the exact same pull.
I think the way it was explained above is bringing in other types of triggers as a comparison (DA/SA triggers), and if you don’t know anything about them, you just end up more lost trying to read it out.
semiautomatic pistol full auto with a fucking shoestring.
The shoestring machinegun that got the ATF letter was a Mini-14 (which importantly had an exposed reciprocating charging handle) if I recall correctly, and it was still very janky. I’m trying to figure out the engineering of the same concept with a Glock with just a string and I am having some trouble.
Just the trigger. A safety in the “handle” would be a grip safety, which some guns have but not Glocks (unless it is some obscure small run model, but certainly none of the common ones). It looks like an extra panel on the back of the grip which is squeezed into the grip when held.
The other commenter is saying the same thing, just in perhaps a less clear way. I think they are saying the Glock’s trigger weight is between what you would expect of a heavy double action and a light single action. The Glock is a consistent weight every time. The design is often referred to as “safe action striker” or often informally just as “striker” fired. The design lacks a large and heavy hammer that needs to be actuated. Many designs after Glocks were introduced have copied this idea, making it a common alternative design to hammer fired.
It’s been a while since I read the book on Glock history, but my memory is that before Glocks many police departments used double action revolvers (S&W 29s for a common example). This lead to police habitually resting their fingers on the triggers. Bad habit, but they got away with it because of the ultra heavy triggers.
When departments switched to Glocks there were a rash of negligent discharges as police kept putting their fingers on the much lighter trigger. One incident in particular where a cop shot a suspect because of this. Despite it being a training issue, many departments became wary of Glocks, so adjustments like the NYPD trigger were born as a way to placate the issue.
California still has a 10 round magazine capacity limit for ordinary private ownership, I believe. (Last I heard the ruling striking it down was stayed).
So, did this cop negligently just leave a super illegal thing (by California legal standards) on the floor for some medical technician to eventually pick up and get legally slapped for?
The Canterville Ghost, by Oscar Wilde.
deleted by creator