1
Taylor814ce 1 point ago +2 / -1

Depending on the year, months typically have between 19 and 21 business days. If the ATF can spend 10 business days conducting the background check and then another 10 business days conducting an appeal, it is actually very possible that those 20 days will stretch out over a calendar month. If a purchaser wastes even one day in between his initial denial and the appeal, then you get to 21 and it is an entire calendar month.

The Background Check Form is only valid for 30 calendar days after it is submitted. Let's say you bought a gun on Dec 18 of last year, after business hours. It's Christmas week, you want to get a present for yourself. Your background check form will expire on January 17. There are 18 business days that separate the purchase date and the background check form expiration. That's because you have Christmas, New Years, Martin Luther King Day, and four weekends in between those dates. If you bought a gun Christmas week, the ATF would be able to technically run out the process so long that even if they approved you after a 20 business day process, you would have to start all over.

So let's say you go back to the gun store two days later on a Friday after work. You submit another Form 4473 and start the process over again. The FBI again uses all 10 days to give you an initial rejection. But when you get your rejection on Friday Feb 5, it comes in at the end of the day and you can't submit your appeal same-day. Well, the FBI doesn't start working appeals on weekends, so the earliest you'd be able to submit it would be the 8th. OOPS, President's day is a Federal Holiday, so even if the FBI begins processing your appeal the same day it is received, the 10 business days would bring you to Feb 22nd. Unfortunately, that is again one calendar day after your background check form expired.

It goes on and on and on and on...

When you incorporate holidays like Thanksgiving and Christmas, two of the most popular holidays for gun purchasing, it is easy to see how millions of firearm purchases per year could fall into this kind of limbo. If the bill were to pass and the ATF were to use all 20 of it's business days to stall gun purchases, they could indefinitely block a lot of gun purchases.

3
Taylor814ce 3 points ago +4 / -1

I cannot tell you how depressing it is to watch the people on this site who (rightly) called bullshit on the Covid-19 death stats turn around and commit the same logic fallacy.

Dying with Covid ≠ dying from Covid

Dying after being vaccinated ≠ dying because they were vaccinated

2
Taylor814ce 2 points ago +4 / -2

Got the Moderna vaccine myself. Yes, my arm hurt for about a week after.

It is insane that "injection site redness" is being elevated to some catastrophic symptom to dissuade people from getting the vaccine.

0
Taylor814ce 0 points ago +2 / -2

Jesus, we spent a year complaining that the Left was classifying people who died with Covid incorrectly as people who died from Covid.

This is the same kind of fallacy. The average age of someone who died after getting a vaccine, IIRC, was 78 (coincidentally, also the age of the country's current life expectancy).

Dying after getting the vaccine is not the same as dying because they got the vaccine.

3
Taylor814ce 3 points ago +3 / -0

It looks like the middle column shouldn't have a percent next to the number. Without a percent symbol next to the numbers in the middle column, it adds up.

For example, look at the 21-49 bracket: the decimal 0.0002 is the same as 0.02%.

So 100% minus 0.0002 really does equal 99.98%. The problem is they tacked on a percent sign after 0.0002

1
Taylor814ce 1 point ago +1 / -0

If you have an HD antenna, unless you're one of the 15,000 homes monitored by Nielsen (and you'd know if you were), then you can watch over the airwaves without contributing to the ratings.

8
Taylor814ce 8 points ago +8 / -0

"One" is added to whatever service branch operates the aircraft. If the President boarded a marine fixed wing aircraft, then yes, it would be called Marine One. If the President boarded an Army helicopter, it would be Army One. A Coast Guard copter? Coast Guard One.

3
Taylor814ce 3 points ago +3 / -0

Okay, hear me out.

On a national level or in tight races, terrible idea. Would result in a fractured Conservative vote, handing victory to Democrats.

But there are super red districts all around the country that are represented by RINOs where this could be very effective in the short term.

Take Liz Cheney, as an example. She won in 2020 with ~68% of the vote. Her Democrat opponent received ~25% of the vote.

There is no way to split 68% of the vote two ways and have the Democrat come out ahead. No matter how you split it, either the Trump Party or GOP comes out ahead.

That should be the focus. Take out the entrenched Establishment GOPers.

1
Taylor814ce 1 point ago +1 / -0

In order to do a live interview like this, he would have had to do a mic check with a producer also looking at his backdrop.

This is equally Fox's fault. Not one producer looked at that and told him to take it down or shift his camera.

1
Taylor814ce 1 point ago +1 / -0

You don't fight for a President or a Congress. You fight for the Constitution.

And that fight doesn't end with a discharge, either...

1
Taylor814ce 1 point ago +1 / -0

How stupid do you have to be to think it would be best for the protesters not to go home and just stay in DC???

12
Taylor814ce 12 points ago +12 / -0

Pay attention to where the graph starts. It starts inbetween 9 and 9:30 pm.

1
Taylor814ce 1 point ago +2 / -1

Possession of a single bullet, however, can run afoul of DC's law prohibiting the possession of unregistered ammunition components.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/replica-bullets-dud-shell-earn-weapons-conviction-for-former-washington-man.amp

1
Taylor814ce 1 point ago +1 / -0

The Impoundment Control Act simply requires that the President deliver his rescission notice to Congress. There is no requirement that it be attached to a bill signing.

President Trump would have been able to use rescission against funding passed into law through a veto override.

0
Taylor814ce 0 points ago +2 / -2

Trump should have vetoed it the minute it reached his desk.

This bill was a high stakes game of hot potato. Everyone knew that unemployment benefits expired on December 27. Whichever branch of government was left holding the bill when December 27 came around was going to be the loser.

If Trump had vetoed it on day one, he could have actually forced a revote. Instead now, he is using recession which, as other people have identified, Congress can ignore if they want and just wait 45 days...

1
Taylor814ce 1 point ago +1 / -0

Saltwater+Bourbon+Maple Syrup+Cloves

Smoked at 250 degrees until the poppers pop.

view more: Next ›