sudo22 @ sudo22 @lemmy.world

Posts

16

Comments

166

Joined

2 yr. ago

Yes I agree with the first 5 words of your comment.

Those other places also implemented things that actually reduce all violence like universal healthcare, workers rights, stronger welfare, maternity/paternity leave, mandatory vacation time, etc.

Places like the UK have lower rates of murder via martial attacks (punches, kicks, strangle, etc) yet I don't think they have gym control limiting how strong you can be.

Happy, healthy, financially safe people don't commit violence.

Yup. Even if you're antigun, States blatantly disregarding federal directives should concern you.

Gun control doesn't stop. The goal is always disarmament and people believing otherwise is why it gets to happen.

My attention span is so torched by the internet I can't anymore. Which makes me sad because I loved reading as a kid.

I do however still enjoy audiobooks while driving.

ChatGPT can be tricked into giving IED instructions if you ask the right way. So it could be a similar situation.

I'm so sorry

I understand. Thank you

I honestly didn't know so I had to look it up. The original said "rhythm game"

@sunaurus@lemm.ee

My guess would be he wasn't self hosting the AI network so the requests were going through a website.

So the concept of context has no meaning for you huh.

In a way I'm rooting for California. The more gun laws they get appealed all the way to SCOTUS, the more national precedent gets set that these laws are illegal in the whole country.

Your comment makes no sense. Government regulations, like most antigun folks want "well regulated" to mean, would mean laws limiting the militia. Well regulated in the 2nd amendment actually means in good working order as my link says.

A well regulated clock keeps accurate time. A well regulated engine produces horse power efficiently and reliably. A well regulated militia has plenty of ammo and supplies and knows how to use them.

SCOTUS ruled it unconstitutional a last year.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

Arms are a "right of the people" not the militia. A militia is a result of, not a prerequisite for, the right to bear arms. "well regulated" doesn't mean government regulation it means well armed, supplied, and trained

Well regulated has nothing to do with government regulations. Its means well armed and trained

No worries. I've done that on lemmy more then once lol

Literally read the first half of the first sentence. "California will ban people from carrying firearms in most public places"

SCOTUS point blank ruled this unconstitutional in the Bruen decision, specifically pointing out banning carry in most public places is unconstitutional.

FFS even he acknowledges what hes doing is unconstitutional "But he acknowledged many of these laws might not survive legal challenges".

"But he acknowledged many of these laws might not survive legal challenges"

How is this not grounds for some form of punishment? Politicians shouldn't be able to write laws even they acknowledge are illegal, gun law or otherwise?