I’m disagreeing with your statement that “you’re only allowed to use deadly force in proportional response,” not with whether this case is being prosecuted rightly or not.

Mate, read that link I put in there. I can tell you, from experience, that if you shoot at someone stealing your property in Texas, where that penal code I posted is from, that exact portion of the statute is going to be used and you will not be convicted. It really is “anyone could have a gun or knife.” At least Texas has it so just theft has to be during the nighttime, so I guess that’s something.

You’ll also get similar worded statutes in many other states in the US, several of which, stating this again, where I’ve had the misfortune of having to research those laws. And that “reasonable belief” part about exposing yourself to risk of serious bodily injury or death? I have seen it applied to people who are simply physically larger than you. Proportional response is a moot concept.

I can’t remember the name of the book now, but in high school we read a ‘true’ story of child abuse. I’m sure it was edited to both tone down and turn up certain elements, but it was pretty much a brutal shock to people who are mostly from decent families that love them. Whether the kids were rich, poor, or middle class in my school, just about everyone there could at least return home to parents that didn’t commit those horrors.

I remember the diapers, the exposure to the elements, and the way the other children were pitted against the abused kid, and honestly? It was the emotional abuse that was the worst to read.

Sorry, but that’s not exactly right, because in several areas, the prevention of death or great bodily harm also includes the scenario where if you were to attempt to reclaim control over your property, you would be putting yourself in those same risk categories. See 9.42 (3)(B) here, where I have had the misfortune of having to research the law before. In other words, if you think the person is stealing your stuff and could harm you if you try to recover said stuff… well, you’re ‘legally’ allowed to start blasting.

I’m not sure about the exact laws where the incident occurred, but in several other states that I know the law of, aggravated assault carries the exact same penalties as attempted murder. Because of the wording of the two laws, aggravated assault is much easier to prove. If you’re a prosecutor, why would you not go with the easier to prove, exact same penalty crime?

You won’t be. If I remember correctly, and I shudder at the memories, you’ll have anthropomorphized versions of the seven sins. Be warned, All hope abandon ye who enter here.

That’s what the beer hat is for.

Hades and Isaac are surprising. They’re both old enough that I would have thought they wouldn’t be flush with players right now. The fallout stuff makes sense, given its fanbase and the show’s influence. I wonder if I should go back and try to 100% either of them now…

You’d be amazed how many people learn the hard way that they first need to head to a separate store to buy a gas container, then head to the gas station. Most places could care less about keeping a container on premises because it is both a rare situation these days, and storage is at a premium in most stores. If you saw the back room or manager’s office, you would see the floor-to-ceiling stacks of inventory (usually drinks or tobacco products).

The photo isn’t great, but my memory of that stretch of road is there is a curve after a bridge. If the load came off and the truck was eastbound, that giant pole would have rolled across oncoming traffic. The poor driver coming the other way never stood a chance of avoiding it.

It’s a good watch. Watch it in the dark.

Damn you and your mouth-watering memory inducers!

Yes, but if you listen to the ‘reviews’ now, all you’re getting is the regurgitated product description compared to the product description of the other contenders. Except instead of the two sentences that were the original description, you get a five sentence opening about the topic, Somewhere between 12-15 sentences about the product that don’t add anything relevant (repeat)^ (for each product), and then a conclusion that’s random, arbitrary, and probably influenced by money.

At least with the older models I can see real information if I can find real reviews. If I have to extrapolate from there to today, I’m still better off.

It’s because these are two idiots trying to sound smart. I have used pre-2015 searches, because sometime between 2009-2016 is when SEO in general started being used. The AI generation just kicked it into high gear. Stuff before 2015 at least appears to offer information that isn’t just reworded lists of advertisements.

I wonder about that. Aren’t dolphins and whales non-buoyant, in the sense that they sink when they die?

Looking, I find https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/what-happens-when-whales-die.html

I guess the dolphin may have been at the floating stage?

Some classics are good enough to read. The problem is in forcing kids to try to do in-depth analysis. Even Charles Dickens or Charlotte Bronte isn’t all that bad to read, until you are squinting at every third word and wondering if this could mean something in the context of the whole book and just maybe you can write about it well enough in your stupid journal that you really want a B in so your parents don’t whip you with the belt again.

No, in another article from last week, he had put the amount they wanted in a separate bank account for them. It was more than the settlement amount. The bonder, at the least, isn’t going to lose money from Trump.

Just look at the two paragraphs: "To be sure, millions of these petrified Americans believe the Democrats have gleefully allowed the “woke” left of their party to systematically destroy everything or every institution they depend upon for quality-of-life issues. Be those pertaining to energy independence, higher education, housing, the financial system, the supply chain, border security, the military, the medical and pharmaceutical industry, the media or entertainment. The woke left now dictates — with the blessing of Democratic politician enablers — that all must now be viewed and run through the distorted lens of identity politics.

But when these same millions of hurting Americans turn their eyes toward a Republican Party that promises to reverse all the damage being done by the left, they see only out-of-touch elitists doing the bidding of the corporate elites, while breaking every promise made."

If that isn’t the to-the-t playbook of ‘both sides’ in a more wordy format, I’ll eat my hat. It also manages to place the blame squarely on the democrats for their ‘wokeness.’ Somehow they’ve broken higher education, the financial system, the supply chain, ‘border security,’ the military… good god, what hasn’t been destroyed by ThE demOCraTS!

Hopefully it brings consequences. Every time a bullet is fired, it is required (and I guess that must be in quotes for police officers…) that you be responsible for that bullet’s consequences. If you shoot at a legitimate threat, but hit the bystander, you should get charged. Cop, not-cop, firefighter, good samaritan with a gun, whatever. Charge them.

We actually do know if the kid kept quiet… because it mentioned in the article that he didn’t.

Pfft, sounds like you can fix the snoring problem, even in america without insurance, by having an american 7 year old neighbor. Damn, I love america.