-
Posts
6,049 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Posts posted by NolaAuTiger
-
-
On 1/21/2024 at 11:33 AM, homersapien said:
Unprofessional maybe
“Maybe”?
You scientists are a weird bunch.
- 1
-
I might Venmo $20 to whoever authors the first legitimate OP-response.
-
Still waiting . . .
- 1
-
Oh, look. Deflection.
How surprising.
- 1
- 1
-
Today, the Hawaii Supreme Court defied SCOTUS’ second amendment precedent in Heller and Bruen.
https://www.courts.state.hi.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/SCAP-22-0000561.pdf
For those lefties who celebrate the decision, guess you’ll let Texas off the hook?!?! In particular, those who accused Texas of flaunting SCOTUS and federal law.
- 1
-
Praying for you man. Hang in there.
- 1
- 1
-
On 3/15/2023 at 8:25 AM, ShocksMyBrain said:
Great stuff!
If you want to try something new: Throw them in the deep fryer for two minutes after you pull off the smoker.
-
5 minutes ago, AU9377 said:
I understand the Latin. That doesn't discount the discussion.
Yes, yes it does.
-
-
What's your favorite all-around wood?
I recently became hooked on, yes, white oak. Gives off a hint of vanilla, with a light-moderate profile. Works especially well for larger cuts of meat. I tend to mix with pecan.
*Hickory is rare as gold right now, in south Louisiana.
-
What is your budget?
-
-
-
-
Cry me a river, b***h.
-
9 hours ago, AU9377 said:
When the other things mentioned include the obvious acts of a former President to undermine our entire electoral system, they are worthy of being mentioned. We have an entire portion of the electorate that would rather adopt a lie than to deal with the truth.
Obiter dictum.
-
-
On 2/1/2024 at 10:22 PM, AURex said:
Texas receives $68.2 Billion. in Federal dollars.
How much do Texans pay the federal government per year?
-
Maybe so
-
-
-
On 2/1/2024 at 9:55 PM, AU9377 said:
Yes, I was referring to social media apps.
What I think is clear is that both topics concern areas where there is a constitutional right established. Freedom of Speech and the 2nd amendment's right to bear arms. My initial question was seeking the opinion of others as to why the same people applauding the public dress down of social media companies in the Senate hearing would be angered by the same questions being asked to the manufacturers of assault weapons?
Subjecting social media companies to even half the number of regulations imposed on gun manufacturer's would be a solid start. I think that's what people want to see.
My solution would get shouted down by both sides, but here it is: Parents, don't give your children iphones.
- 1
-
On 2/1/2024 at 9:48 PM, AU9377 said:
Lawsuits against gun manufacturers are extremely difficult to bring. They have a great deal of protection under the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/can-gun-makers-be-liable-in-mass-shootings
I am not against regulating social media platforms in some way. My question is do they bear responsibility simply because they exist or do they have to fail to do something in order to be culpable?
My point is, you can bring those lawsuits nonetheless. State consumer protection laws are a good example. The same cannot be said of social media platforms. Granted, I don't think badgering Zuckerberg on national television solves anything; pointless clickbait in my opinion.
If a gun manufacturer can be held liable under a typical state consumer protection law, I think a social media company should too. I haven't seen that happen, however.
-
4 hours ago, AU9377 said:
Is their product not used to kill innocent children?
Yes. And it is, at the very least, possible for the parents of those children to hold a gun manufacturer liable.
Yet, when the same harm is wrought via social media, parents have no recourse.
Colorado Supreme Court bans Trump from ballot
in Political Smack Talk
Posted
🤓
Hope all is well, Didba. Bill baby bill!