How about two deathrow inmates are put together in a room with a whole bunch of things that look like door knobs but are actually one way gas knobs. You open and they don’t close. The gas part is easy just go to a welding shop. Tell them it’s for “welding”. They’ll understand.
The detail about having two inmates in the same chamber… I don’t know, I think one would help the other think about escaping by trying the next knob cuz the previous one didn’t do anything. You probably want some loud music or a mixing fan to mask gas hissing.
For a fun example to talk about look at Deadmau5’s Purrari.
The Nyan cat wrapped Ferrari.
Legally Ferrari had little they could do. There was some things to do with putting a modified badge they could stop. While on finance they could recall the loan due to the modifications affecting the equity in the car.
But any seller of any product has the backstop that they can ban further purchases and refuse future services. Or even potentially be required to buy their home nation.
Why would Nitrogen gas suppliers not want this?
As a global company, do you want to risk losing a major market by supplying a product for executions.
If you sell your product for executions you are officially selling a poison.
Do you want the regulation involved to have to background check every customer to ensure they are not using it for lethal purposes?
Do you want the additional import and export controls on your product?
Are you held liable in any way if someone deliberately uses your product for euthanasia or suicide? Potentially. That’s why several countries have limits on the volume of paracetamol an individual can purchase.
The Terms of Service is a sticking plaster, probably not even enforceable, but the bare minimum to avoid further regulations on the industry. But it’s certainly worth nitrogen gas suppliers trying to avoid themselves being dragged into a hornets nest of politics, morality, and costly regulation.
Banning a small customer, in prisons, from buying your product could save you a lot of money in the long run.
Only for direct sales. Prisons could still just go buy through an intermediary, unless the first party sale contract also forbids that. Even then, it’s questionably not enforceable. It’d be like me selling my car, but doing so with a contract stipulating that the buyer can’t re-sell the car to someone that may use it for a particular (and legal) purpose.
Is your position that sexual abuse cant occur to an adult, that when it occurs it can and should be laughed off (what other physical abuses should be treated the same) or a third position entirely?
In the not too distant past, when we were over tye age of 18 and got felt up by someone we didn’t fancy, we saw this as an obnoxious experience, and didn’t dwell on it, much less pretend to be “traumatized”. Today, entirely too many of us are pretending to be more fragile than fine china
I actually moved on to other hobbies, beginning in the early 10s. Acquiring a working knowledge of explosives, along with discovering just how vulnerable churches and synagogues are, prompted me to expand my horizons
The following research youtu.be/FEM-r3YWKZg?si=G_qu_Un6uqVV5fzO may actually turn out to be replicaable. And in an era where more and more Americans devote their every waking hour to binge watching and playing video games, fewer and fewer of us will be capable of comprehending comedy of the most gallows variety
Trump literally put his fingers inside her in a dressing room according to the deposition. But sure. Let Trump put his fingers inside you bruv, I’m sure it won’t be traumatizing.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but wouldn’t you say that meekly taking any abuse, violence, assault, harassment etc without standing up to the perpetrators would be the weak thing to do? Today we ain’t taking shit from people who think they can exert power over us and the people who used to get away with it don’t seem to like that much.
E. Jean Carrol didn’t have to take shit from Trump back when this incident allegedly happened either. Last anyone heard, girl wasn’t trying on a straight jacket in that dressing room, and could’ve decked him. Or, if this wasn’t practical, headbutted, kicked, or bitten him
How is buy now pay later “niche”? There’s literally a scene in the bible about this practice. People have been buying things on credit for longer than money has existed.
And they have people with… Dark (!!!) skin colors and funny languages there, can you imagine?
The place has been ranked cheapest and best products for years, wouldn’t want to have that because the brands are not the known overpriced a level products, and as said, those weird foreigners there!
I’m convinced this “pinch” people are still feeling is the result of people forgetting that the government gave them money to go out and stimulate the economy during a pandemic where they had few places to spend money.
With a handful of exceptions in the grocery store, all signals are suggesting the American economy is as good as, if not better than, it was prior to 2020. The items mentioned in the linked article have increased in cost just as they always have when environmental variables have an impact on goods and services - it’s not about the economy or inflation. If anything, we should be paying more attention to climate change in order to bring our grocery bill down.
If you’re trying to save money at the food store, I would highly suggest finding a local produce market or farmers market. I shop at this little local market in my city where my total weekly bill is usually around $80 (actually down from over $100 in 2021). I shopped at an Aldi once, the limited produce was literally nearly garbage and the prices were not great compared to what I normally pay. We all buy different things though so YMMV.
They didn’t say that the stimuli from years ago caused it. They said that we received the stimuli when we were already sitting around not spending money except as absolutely necessary. These two things combined made it FEEL LIKE the economy was a lot better then than it is now. If anything, to me this says we should have a UBI already.
Mate you and I are on the same side in this thing. The only thing I’m trying to point out is, if you’re going to argue against someone, argue against what they’re actually saying, not a non-sequitor, even if that non-sequitor is the normal argument you see in this situation.
But you were incorrect. You said the economy only felt like it was better than it is now. It was better. The consumer economy has been on a consistent decline for many years as prices have been on a consistent increase. The economy is “doing well” right now because the stock market is doing well and companies are making profits. That was true when the last round of stimulus went out as well, but grocery prices were still lower for consumers than they are now.
I agree that we need a UBI, but this is not a UBI issue. This is a price gouging issue. UBIs wouldn’t stop price gouging. In fact, without laws to prevent such price gouging, a UBI would be far less useful.
See, this is a rebuttal. Something that lets me know you’re reading words and not just dropping the first semi-relevant article.
Yes. I agree. The economy is worse now than it was. And I have never argued that it wasn’t. I currently believe it’s a bit of both of the above, actually. That corporations are shit and absolutely looking to extract any value they can, and that people in general rebounded a bit hard after covid lockdowns ended, but that was inevitable. I think that COVID lockdowns caused corporations to start increasing their prices, “well traffics down we have to stay afloat somehow!” Which they naturally don’t want to give up now. Combined with the rebounding I mentioned earlier where people temporarily more willing to spend, and here we are.
Absolutely regulation needs to be put in place. My intent with the UBI line was simply, people spend money when they have money, put money into people’s hands and (with a little regulation) the economy will start moving towards good again.
It was an extremely relevant article since my rebuttal was based on it. This makes me think you just rejected it outright because you decided it wasn’t relevant without even looking.
Again, it’s irrelevant to MY ARGUMENT. In my first post I did not make any mention of my beliefs.
The chain of events from my perspective is:
OP makes an argument about how the stimuli made the economy appear, relatively, worse now than it actually is.
You replied to an argument about the stimuli CAUSING the economy to be shit.
I replied, clarifying OPs original stance. The only bit of my beliefs in the first reply is the last sentence, where I say OPs argument is a better case for UBI than it is for the current state of the economy.
You reply with an article attacking OPs views.
I reiterate my views, significantly different from OPs.
You again attack claims that I have not made.
My entire existence in this thing is one simply asking you to argue, WITH OP, on the words they’ve actually said. And somehow we’re here, me acting as a surrogate OP because you can’t seem to parse that I’m not the one making the claims, just interpreting them.
Then again you are flying squid, not reading squid.
That’s fine. It happens. I encourage you to go back and reread the OPs post, and your reply to it. I think you’ll see why I’m so exasperated.
You make good points, they’re valid and based in reality. I’d encourage you to try to fully understand the opponents views before attacking them, though. Thank you for showing a bit of humility.
You are always free to join one of the many Conservative communities online. They’re all badly run shitholes full of awful people, but I repeat myself…
That special rapporteur doesn’t know his head from his ass. Airdrops alone kept west Berlin fed and supplied for an entire year from 1948 until 1949 during the communist blockade of Berlin.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.