Tar_Alcaran

Ok but, this isn’t anti-union, this is doing something union don’t like.

There’s a world of difference between dismantling the very concept of a union (what conservatives love to do), and just doing something that doesn’t benefit workers, which makes unions speak up against it (what all the rich love to do).

It’s on a corrugated metal floor. I don’t think that’s an open field, probably a non-hardened shelter (aka: a shed).

What if you remade the Jumanji remake, but instead of actually writing, you just fill 2 hours with references and “haha just kidding” jokes.

It lets you pay for the oncoming lawsuit

Oh no…

Well, I mean, some people do, most don’t. So it depends on who they are.

I have a friend who has wireless everything, and bragged he even had a wifi coffee maker.

So when I asked him for coffee, he walked to the kitchen, grabbed a cup, but it under the coffee maker, walked back, fidgeted with his phone while showing me how cool it was, walked to the coffee maker, got the cup, came back and handed it to me.

He did appreciate me asking about wireless mugs.

Everything is in an offline VLan

This is the way.

I don’t need ANYONE to control my house when not in my house, and if that means I don’t get to either, then oh well.

Also, 1300 RPM should be enough for anyone.

Yes, “they” do, for values of “they”.

You can have a scope with magnification as your “longer range” optic, and use something like a red dot for close-range shooting where the scope would get in the way.

You can do this by putting a “piggyback” sight on top of your big scope, but that gives you a lot of offset (your “dot” is far above where you shoot), which makes aiming harder. (And attaching a scope to a scope makes for suboptimal stability) The other method is by using an angled adapter, so you just turn the gun sideways a bit, and if you’re using the right stuff, you can just shoot like that with the same sighting and alignment.

Of course, that’s mostly useful for people who expect to shoot at stuff both 300m and 20m away, which generally means military, sports shooting and people who wish they could do either.

It’s trained on reality, not the feelings of conservatives

The entire “ecosystem” of Russian leadership is built around a strongman. If Putin dies, the next one win based on the criteria that made Putin the leader. So there are two options: a big fucking fight, or someone roughly as bad.

And if it’s option 2, their level of shittyness depends mostly on how effective Putin was in defenestrating his rivals.

At least Florida has trees, though.

For now

Exactly. The growler is great when it’s emitters outrange the enemy missiles, not so much when they don’t.

Now granted, I dont think I’m smarter than the entire US Navy, so they probably thought of this too, but it seems like a big issue to me.

Now now, there are still some parts that the fire is still spreading to.

German Aircraft Frigates.

Bravo!

The mother can, at any point in time, choose not to let someone else use her body. Doing so, practically, in all your examples would result in the birth of the child.

This isn’t some clever gotcha, the point of my argument is that the child has no right to use the mothers body to survive. If someone decides not to let someone else use their body, and that means the child dies, then so be it, because bodily autonomy supercedes life.

My argument isn’t that a mother should be able to kill a child just because she feels like it. It’s acceptable to kill someone to maintain bodily autonomy, that’s my argument.

Your “clever” examples all have options where both bodily autonomy are maintained AND life is maintained, which is a double win.

Best I can do is “ET” for the Atari 2600

Yeah, things have hugely improved in Gaza since one of the most powerful countries in the world got rid of their “democrats” in government.

Ohnowaititstheopposite.

Morality is subjective and many different systems exist.

However, mine is the best one because it leads to optimal human welfare and happiness. If you can show your system is better, I’ll happily change my mind, but until that time, if you follow a system that doesn’t lead to optimal human welfare and happiness, you are, thus, intentionall working against it, and are a thus a monster.