Jump to content

Euler

Members
  • Posts

    1,308
  • Joined

Everything posted by Euler

  1. Alternative story #1 He attempts to comfort the 11-year-old like the story says. When the guy turns his attention to him, he tries to draw a pocket pistol, scattering the wallet and keys that he had in the same pocket, but he's slow or he fumbles it. The guy pushes him to the ground, making him drop the firearm if it wasn't already dropped, and pounds the crap out of him. Alternative story #2 (which I favor) Same as story #1, but he's unwilling to use his firearm, thinking the mere appearance of a firearm will save him, or it doesn't have a round chambered. The guy pushes him and pounds the crap out of him. Either way, he may or may not have even had a holster. Adding a wallet and keys to the same pocket as the firearm is ... sub-optimal. As for becoming involved at all, there's no law that prohibits you from trying to stop a man beating on a woman and infant, even though he wasn't actually attempting to stop the man in this case. There's also no law that says you must stop it. Some people would walk on by. Some people would try to help the woman and children. It's your choice. I think this guy's first error is that he didn't seem to think that a man who was already violent would become more violent.
  2. Every state, including Illinois, has laws that permit the justified shooting of dogs that attack livestock. Livestock is defined by law, as well. It includes the usual things, like cows, pigs, chickens, and (as in this case) horses. Some states include sheep or other animals. Curiously, Illinois includes ostriches. I guess the ostrich lobby was strong on the day that law was passed. BTW, "livestock" does not include household pets in any state. So if you're out walking your dog and another dog attacks it, lethal force is (probably) not an option (depends on location). OTOH if you're out walking (or riding) your ostrich, you may defend it with any amount of force the situation requires.
  3. Because if you aren't invited (and don't have a CCL and there's no sign), it's a UUW.
  4. By posting the "no carry" sign, the owner makes it illegal for everyone to carry. So, yes, the owner has determined that no one may carry.
  5. Wasn't that one of the anti-2A bills last year? Applicants, including renewals, had to apply at ISP offices. Online was to be eliminated. Now they've made you think it was YOUR idea.
  6. Andrzejewski (the cop) filed an appeal with the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals on 24 August. He's being represented by the corporate counsel of the City of Waterbury. Whichever side loses, the next step is the US Supreme Court. I think I'd love to see Andrzejewski and the City of Waterbury try, but I can easily imagine every police union in the country trying to talk them off the ledge if they do. CA2 Case Docket Unfortunately, case documents are not free to download.
  7. Intermediate scrutiny: The government has to show that a law actually accomplishes its intended purpose. The Federal District Court is saying that the law prohibiting otherwise legal carry does not pass intermediate scrutiny. The logical conundrum is that the government could argue that the law prohibiting otherwise legal carry is exactly why otherwise legal carriers aren't committing violent crimes in the forest preserve. Because we're obeying the law, we aren't committing violent crimes. Thus the law works as intended. A stronger argument would be to ask how many legal carriers commit violent crimes outside the forest preserves, where the prohibition does not exist. A similar case in Delaware a few years ago asked an even better question: Could the state show how many illegal carriers decided not to commit violent crimes upon seeing the sign prohibiting firearms in the park? (Hint: It couldn't.)
  8. One of the relaxed requirements during the state of emergency is that certificates for renewal classes don't have to be uploaded until after the state of emergency ends. You still have to take a renewal class. You still have to upload the certificate. Eventually.
  9. I open stuff in other windows all the time without error. 5xx errors are server errors. They should be completely independent of whatever you're doing with your browser. 500 is the code for "unspecified" server error. IOW the server is saying, "Oops, something bad happened, but I don't know what." If there's an error log on the server, it might be worth looking at it.
  10. Civil and criminal asset forfeiture already exists. No extra laws are required. No court orders are required. IMO the laws are already too broad to allow police seizures. But if the city thinks some assets are derived from proceeds of a crime, that's all it needs. Lawsuits would instruments for a press circus only.
  11. There are echoes of this issue in Florida right now, the up-shot being that SAF is saying mean things about GOA, apparently provoked by GOA saying something critical about SAF once combined with some more recent events. GOA
  12. Trump Jr. appears to be claiming credit for sinking Chipman's nomination. Business Insider
  13. Euler

    Blank screen

    If the core application engine is intermittently generating blank pages, I highly doubt "tweaking" a cosmetic setting is going to fix it. That's more like a race condition or inappropriate handling of an internal error.
  14. I can't find the previous discussion, which was just tacked on to the end of some other discussion, anyway. I don't use the new themes, since they don't address the biggest problem, anyway. Therefore, I don't think they're the problem with blank screens. Nevertheless, I've gotten blank screens. The entire HTML provided by server is: <html><head></head><body></body></html> So it's not just empty content. There's actually nothing there, not even META tags or LINK tags for CSS, including no attributes on the HTML tag.
  15. If the cops seize your mags as contraband, even in error, you'd have to sue to get them back, which would cost more than just buying new mags. That's the game. However, then the cops would also have to fill out forms and file reports. If they're already doing that because they arrested you for something else, it's no big deal for them. But if you're not under arrest, it's extra work they don't want to have to do. That's the game, too. Some people assert that the 15-round limit is criminally enforceable despite state preemption. Some (like me) would assert that it's not. How many hours of a lawyer's time is it worth to you to be right? Carry what you want. If it saves your life, it's worth the hassle.
×
×
  • Create New...