Snaynay1

They got to her with the one thing politicians care about more than anything, their money source. 

3 hours ago, Littleronin said:

That might be the most eloquently worded "Fuck you, you fucking moron" letter I have ever laid eye on. 

The Marine Corps calls those Velvet daggers. Marine Corps officers spend years perfecting their use of velvet daggers to ruin the careers of those they don't like. 

Belt fed weapons are even more fun.  And wear some hearing protection next time if it is too loud. An AR is not very loud compared to other rifles out there. There is almost zero kick to one due to the buffer spring and it is pretty fun to shoot. Go to a range with an AR that has 300 + yard targets and see how you do.

maybe they can get some sweet ballot harvesting going on next election

17 hours ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

Also, there is money to be made in making a front end for all of these store fronts like retroarch!  

I have been paying money to gamex now for a few years.

lol

On 11/26/2018 at 7:40 PM, Jwheel86 said:

From what I can tell it's all Army units, and US Northern Command has stated they aren't doing law enforcement, just Force Protection. What I'm asking is Force Protection a justifiable use of lethal force in the eyes of the States. If an FBI agent kills someone while doing FBI business it's up to the feds to determine if it's a good shoot or not, not the State. But the same FBI agent shoots someone breaking into his home, it's on the State to investigate. So if an Army MP isn't doing law enforcement and lights someone up, couldn't that fall on the State to investigate if it the shooting was justified under self defense laws? 

Local authorities would defer to the military to investigate it, IE NCIS, CID, or the FBI.

On 11/28/2018 at 12:10 PM, RedSoxFan9 said:

 

oopsie!

Maybe he should have said they need to just drone them instead of throwing tear gas at them. We have gone for almost two decades now droning all kinds of people around the world with nobody giving a shit. Then he wouldn't have to worry about people bringing up his association with tear gas manufacturers.

Well there goes my home video source of wives taking the BBC. This blows.

Wondering if we will finally find out if he had any involvement in JFKs assassination.

On 11/21/2018 at 5:17 PM, CayceG said:

I don't think they're being deployed with guns.

There have been grunts on the border for a decade already and they go nowhere without weapons.There is a whole JTF that goes on constant deployments down there.

With this in mind, the Department of Defense developed an innovative approach so that the Navy and Marine Corps may interdict, search, seize and arrest.03 Keep in mind that the Navy and Marine Corps are not included in the Posse Comitatus Act. Only as a matter of policy has the law been applied to these military services.' 4 Section 37535 of the new Act directs the Secretary of Defense to issue regulations to insure that military assistance provided does not interdict a vessel, search, seize or arrest. However, that Section only applies to activities authorized under the new Act and only if such activity was not otherwise authorized by law. As the authority of the Navy and Marine Corps does not come from the new Act, restraints applicable only to the new Act do not affect them. This position is reinforced by Section 378,96 which emphasizes that nothing in the new Act was Intended to limit executive authority in existance before its enactment. The Department of Defense Directive requires the prior approval of the Secretary of Defense before the Navy or Marine Corps may participate In interdiction of a vessel or aircraft, a search or seizure, an arrest or other activity that is likely to subject civilians to the exercise of military power that is regulatory, proscriptive or compulsory in nature. -27- • I. ° o o , o o " . - , . . , • • . . . . . . • . • . -.. .• . * It seems strange to see the above language in a DOD Directive implementing the new Act. The test to be applied for use of the Navy and Marine Corps is the same as must be found for an emergency circumstance under the new Act.98

On 11/21/2018 at 4:44 PM, Jwheel86 said:

Let's say Trump gets his massacre, could the States arrest the Commanding Officers for murder? They aren't on Federal property, Posse Comitatus of clearly is still in effect. Under what authority are they using deadly force since it isn't federal law enforcement?

The Marine Corps and Navy don't fall under the act. They are only bound by it by memo from years ago. Hence why they have been called in the past to put down riots along with the national guard

I guess salad is no longer good for you

On 11/13/2018 at 5:33 PM, Remarkableriots said:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/pg-e-knew-about-problems-with-sparks-that-may-have-set-off-killer-california-wildfire/ar-BBPFfjh?ocid=AMZN

If PG&E is found out to be at fault for this fire what do you think will happen to them?

Nothing, California passed a law that lets them pass on any fines or liability to its customers.

Sounds like how Palm Springs makes all the Mexicans live further east out to Coachella.

5 hours ago, TwinIon said:

By that logic, no object, substance, or act should be banned.

 

I think the evidence for my assumption is the dramatically lower gun death rate in countries where strong bans and penalties exist. I doubt we'd ever get it from 12 per 100k down to the .06 of Japan, but inching it towards the 3 of Switzerland might be doable. Cutting it in half would mean 18k fewer deaths a year.

Switzerland has one of the highest rates of gun ownership in the world. And I am sure most of them are fully automatic assault rifles, with 30 round magazines. We have more deaths from guns because we are just fucked up as a whole. 

My mom refuses to this day to remember her watching my father beat me with a fucken wooden cooking spoon.

5 hours ago, Anathema- said:

my dickhead could use a jerk

Did you jerk it yet?

After spending an hour reading about it all, it is going to be interesting.  Does somebody sue and have the case go to the Supreme court where they will go back to where the senator that proposed the Amendment stated it was just for newly freed slaves and their children. Originalists could convince other court members to side with the original intention of the senator that proposed the amendment? Or do they live with an executive order for 2 possibly 6 more years until another president comes around and deletes it? That way nobody has to worry about the Supreme court deciding on the matter.

I am going to go with somebody is going to immediately sue and it is going to end up in front of SCOTUS with a possible shit outcome for them.

Either way if that is the line of thinking of those that surround Trump they need to go away.

Has this issue ever been argued in front of the Supreme Court?

Just now, skillzdadirecta said:

That's exactly the one I was thinking of... one of Bay's best movies too 

Lol I had no idea it was a Bay movie. I loved it, especially this scene.

10 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

 

I can't wait for Michael Bay to turn this into a movie 

It could be a sequel to the last crazy bodybuilder movie that took place in Florida.

On 10/23/2018 at 12:25 PM, CitizenVectron said:

What are the US' major victories since WWII? Gulf War I? Is that it? Does the Bosnian air campaign count for anything?

Until the times of us being able to kill everyone again and level whole towns there won't be too many decisive winning ends to wars in the future.

looks like a three stooges prop from one of their shorts when they were in the middle east.