• 6 Posts
  • 143 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle



  • Blackbeard@lemmy.worldtoComic Strips@lemmy.worldSeeing a lot of this lately...
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    not doing good things that make people’s lives better

    They sit back and watch the world burn

    They spent billions to upgrade drinking water infrastructure across the country, as well as roads and bridges. They protected and strengthened the Affordable Care Act by allowing states to extend postpartum coverage up to 12 months, by disallowing several state-level work requirements for Medicaid, by fixing the “family glitch”, by dropping the number of uninsured by 3.5%, by allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices, by capping the price of insulin, and by banning surprise billing for out-of-network care. They raised the minimum wage for federal workers. They forgave billions in student loans. They expanded VA health care and benefits for veterans exposed to burn pits, Agent Orange, and other toxic substances. They rescheduled marijuana. They established decade-long tax credits for everything from electric vehicles to direct air capture and sequestration of carbon dioxide. They ratified the international Kigali Amendment on reducing HFCs. They implemented drinking water standards for PFAS. I could go on, but I’m bored.

    Get your fingers out of your fucking ears, open your eyes, and stop repeating baseless propaganda. I’ll also echo what the commenter above suggested:

    kindly shut the fuck up. I’m an American, I’ve ACTUALLY had to live in this country with Trump and Biden as president, and it’s no contest for me.

    edit: Downvoting incontrovertible facts. Again. This community never ceases to amaze me.




  • No, that’s not a plain text reading of the statute. You have to refer to the definition specified, and you can’t replace it with the implication. It would be:

    “or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.”

    So clearly the second phrase is meant to capture mechanical alterations that turn it into a weapon with automatic fire, not mechanical alterations that turn it into a weapon with simulated automatic fire, or a weapon that approximates automatic fire. Intent isn’t the operative clarifier in the sentence, the functionality is, and intent only comes into play if you intend to convert it into the different functionality. A bump stock doesn’t do that.















  • If the immediate family of the person donated it, sure.

    But even still, it’s not about what my opinion is. They have a committee who reviews these things case by case, and they’re making recommendations about their archives based on historical context, educational value, and the individual being studied.

    edit to add: Gage himself engaged with Harvard, and he wasn’t held against his will. He knew he was a subject of analysis, and his family willingly donated his remains to an educational end. The two are not comparable in any way, shape, or form.


  • I’m not sure I’d go so far as to say their thoughts are one way or another after just skimming or Ctrl+Fing the document for less than 3 minutes. Furthermore, Gage’s own family donated his skull to Harlow, and Harlow donated it to Harvard, so with the exception of Gage himself the transaction was consensual. Plus Gage gave the tamping iron to Harvard Medical School personally, so there’s not as much ethical gray area with his case as there would be with someone who’s remains were taken without anyone’s permission. That doesn’t seem inconsistent at all, especially since most of the recommendations in the report hinge on acknowledgement of humanity and historical context, rather than focusing on a binary conclusion about whether or not remains are ok to keep.