sith_lord_zitro @ sith_lord_zitro @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

13

Joined

2 yr. ago

Just saw your comment many weeks later.

HEY EVERYONE, I FOUND THE VIRTUE SIGNALER HERE!

This was a simple, non-controversial thread and you had to be the one to make it an issue.

I was browsing comments to see if this has been said. People have wider feet than they think and really good pair of well fitting shoes makes a big difference. I use New Balance as my daily drivers and for work I wear insulated Timberlands in the winter and Reebok tactical boots in the summer. Game changer when you have comfortable shows.

That depends on what Toyota you're talking about lol.

I think the last time we cared about another country's opinion of how we live our lives was in 1775.

Yeah, she's also lost the support of many of her party members.

Art. II, § 6: Right to Bear Arms No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing herein shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons.

New Mexico has it in it's constitution that carrying a firearm has been legal since 1911. Concealed was allowed in 2003.

She's about to term out anyway, so she doesn't really care what it does to her.

My bad for assuming that we were engaging in mature discourse about gun restriction enforcement and who is responsible for it.

It's clear now that you're not interested in a conversation. Your just looking for someone to nod their head and agree with you instead of asking questions.

Can you enlighten me on that? How does it work if you want to ban "assault weapons" and defund the police? Isn't that counter intuitive? A police state is almost required to enforce the laws that are put in place like this. I have a difficult time understanding how that works.

Do you support your local PD?

So we want to spend more money on policing people and their vehicles? There seems to be a misunderstanding on how rural America works. I don't know many people, including myself, who can have both a work pickup and a car to piddle around in. My pickup was purchased with work in mind, but since it's my only vehicle, I have to use it for day to day use as well. You can't force people who live in rural areas to give up vehicles that are necessary for them in the places they live.

This whole issue about pollution is far more nuanced than just regulating pickups. Do you purchase products that are made in China, India, Bangladesh, Indonesia, etc.? If you do, this is more of a contributor to global pollution than pickup trucks in the west. I can reasonably guarantee that the forestry work I do does more at protecting the environment than your virtue signaling does.

Many people, myself included, use pickups this size for their livelihood. Mine is purposely modified with a lift and oversized tires for the daily off road use that is required for my work. Contractors use vehicles this size to haul loads of materials, tools, or people to jobsites. If you want to remove all of these vehicles from the road, then tell me what your replacement is. Tell me what I should be driving to get through 2+ feet of snow or 8+ inches of mud to do my job. You seem to want to dictate what other people are allowed to use, so in your infinite wisdom, what is the alternative?

There is so much anger to unpack here, I don't even know where to begin. Violence directed behavior such as yours is just the start. In the near future you'd be trying assault people who think differently from you and could potentially kill someone. I think damaging your person before that happens would count as self defense.

It's such a ridiculous argument that people in the United States driving pickup trucks are solely killing the planet. When it comes to climate damage, it ses to fall exclusively on the west. Not China or India, but exclusively Tundra drivers in the US.