Jump to content

DanRydell

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1397
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by DanRydell

  1. Parents coming in.
    If there was an uptick in parents being prosecuted who were negligent and word got out that this was how it was going to be in the future, I wonder if more parents would do a better job of securing their firearms.

    That’s been my gun policy proposal for years. Own whatever the fuck you want but if a crime is committed with your gun and you either entrusted it to the perpetrator or failed to reasonably secure it, you’re criminally and civilly responsible as if you were the perpetrator.
    • Hook 'Em 6
    • Like 1
  2. how did he threaten him? Having a firearm pointed at the ground is not a threat. It is legal. Especially on your own property. Especially in Texas.

    Someone’s holding of a firearm can both be legal and also cause someone to reasonably believe that force is immediately necessary to protect against the armed person’s use or attempted use of unlawful force.

    Pulling out a gun in the middle of a verbal altercation is about 2500x more immediately threatening than having your gun unsuccessfully taken away from you.
    • Like 2
  3. No brandishing happened. Well not until the one moron grabbed the other morons gun and slung him off the porch. It was insanely stupid to bring the gun out but that is not illegal. What was illegal was the threat to take it away and shoot him then the assault with the grabbing of the gun and slinging him off his own porch. By the letter of the law it will be justified even though none of this should've happened. 

    So I don’t have a right to exercise non-lethal self defense by attempting to disarm someone threatening me with a firearm?
  4. You're going to get blasted and get off if you attack someone on their porch while they have a gun and tell that person I'm going to take that from you and shoot you with it. Regardless of being a fucking moronic asshole who chose to bring the gun out which is legal. He may have wanted to kill him but he didn't initiate the physical aggression. 2 imbeciles dancing. 

    So your argument is that attempting to brandish a firearm justifies lethal force but actually brandishing a firearm does not justify non-lethal force?
  5. On 11/30/2021 at 8:56 PM, Jkwellborn said:


    If you’re trying to take someone’s gun away, particularly after you’ve been in some type of altercation and threatened them, yeah, that’s gonna justify lethal violence.

    If the mere holding of a gun justifies lethal force, then the shooter was by definition the aggressor in this instance and thus has no right to self defense. 

  6. The music and the looks and the settings are great and Leto gives the best comedic performance of the year.

    I can’t tell if this movie was supposed to be funny but it’s definitely better if you assume they’re in on the joke. If it’s supposed to be The Godfather in 80s/90s fashion, then it was a big miss.


  7. I didn't even know there were more than 2 sisters.


    The movie doesn’t really address it but the three older sisters aren’t Richard’s. They were from the mom’s prior marriage (she was widowed). Richard also has 6-7 other biological children.
  8. 1995 maybe, but 1994 sounds too early.  I dunno.
    I went there with one of my roommates on a really cold November or December night in 1996 and he was saying how new it was (his dad did some work for HEB and wanted to see what he thought of it as a young hipster).  So yeah late 1995 is probably right and we were there a year later.  I grew up on Dominick's in Chicago, and had been to some HEB's in Austin.  I didn't realize what Central Market "was" for a few more years in terms of offerings and target market.  Only thing I remember from walking around was how purposely convoluted the aisles were (by design, obviously).  I didn't step in one again for probably a half decade.  
    Speaking of old Austin and C/M's.........what used to be down there at the Westgate shopping center before it became that strip center?  By the time I ventured down there, it was close to being totally built out but that was in the late 90's.  What was there just before that?  

    Westgate was just a regular (but relatively small) indoor mall. There was a movie theater (8 screens IIRC), Bookstop, Bealls, Service Merchandise, Solo Serve, a pizza place, an arcade, and a couple of other stores.

    The Strait Music across Ben White was also a four screen movie theater. Other than Riverside, those two were the only first-run theaters on the south side for most the 90s after the closing of the Barton Creek Mall theater (now Abuelo’s) and until the opening of the Barton Creek Cinema (now condos).
  9. And that's fair.  Like I've said, KR has a horseshoe and clover shoved up his ass.  A million tiny things could have happened that would change this verdict (potentially) to actually committing crimes.  How he potentially threaded the needle, I don't know.  But every single person here should be thinking if they really are guaranteed a fair trial in this day and age.  It's a scary thought that some activist can spout off on twitter and now your life is over, even while staying within the lanes of the law.  

    In this day and age? When exactly do you think the criminal justice system better guaranteed a fair trial than the present?
    • Hook 'Em 2
  10. My girlfriend is chair of her high school English department. In order to comply with Abbott’s pornography hunt, three teachers have to read each book so the district is actually having to buy additional copies of each book so the three teachers can each have one to read. So congrats to the publishers and authors I guess.

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
  11. True.  The marks/names are a combination of descriptive (university) and geographically descriptive (Austin, Texas).  However, by long use, such as by UT Austin, such marks can go from weak to strong.  And I think we can rest assured that UT is considering legal action, because that's the way we roll.
    UD was founded in 1956, and UT-D, under that name, in 1969.  That's barely enough time for UD to "work up" a case of a strong trademark.  We have 140 years and an ostensibly very strong brand.  But it's mostly the fact that we're so aggro about it that makes me think this may be an issue.

    There’s probably more potential for confusion with Austin College and (Stephen F.) Austin State University than UT-Austin.
  12. Xander shouldn't have told Liana the idol was fake.  Then they wouldn't have split the vote and he could have played it for one of the two.  Would have been sweet to see her try to play it later too.

    I think he probably wasn’t allowed to.
  13. Shan seemed really promising for a while but what a shitshow her last two weeks have been, between freaking out at Ricard over her extra vote, spilling the beans about Liana’s advantage to Tiffany thereby rendering it useless, and then for some reason telling Tiffany at tribal to vote for Sydney so Xander’s idol didn’t get flushed.

×
×
  • Create New...