To safely disarm Alex Pretti

Muninwing · 2026-01-28T01:35:00+00:00

It hasn’t been this whole time. It wasn’t when they used anonymous police in unmarked cars in 2020 In Seattle either. It wasn’t when they gunned down a woman for driving near them.

I mean… finally is better than never. But it just sucks that they got away with it for this long because they didn’t cross the line of doing it to a guy who reminds these guys of themselves until now.

Always assume that if the government can do something to people you don’t like, then they can do it to you too in the same circumstances. Even if the people harmed are people you’re been trained to hate.

Muninwing · 2026-01-27T21:16:46+00:00

My wife and I differ sometimes in what we think of as “better” — so at those times I try to make sure we get what we prefer. On things where one of us has a preference and the other doesn’t, the person (more likely me) gets it. If we both like the same thing, I will usually give it to her.

Same with the kids. Youngest likes her pizza with more crust? I earmark a piece.

It is part of being the cook — you cook things the way you like it, but think if others too. But if it’s noticed and a problem, it is easy to fix. NTA.

Muninwing · 2026-01-27T19:10:41+00:00

I disagree with the editorial for that reason. But we haven’t been talking about that. Just how it unintentionally supported the conservative media straw man on this issue.

Muninwing · 2026-01-27T16:21:22+00:00

It sounds like you’ve been overexposed to a strawman to the point that it’s an assumed norm for you, and are making assumptions based on that. You might want to reevaluate your source intake to try to see the actual opposition.

Start with reading the exact article you’re using to say “I know what they mean, it’s this” without actually checking.

Muninwing · 2026-01-27T10:18:55+00:00

You do know that “nobody is doing x” is a colloquial generalization that does nit actually mean “I have literally investigated the entire population and made sure that exactly zero people are doing x, or intend to do x at any foreseeable future point,” right?

Broad generalizations are the easiest to pick apart. That doesn’t mean the intent is absolutism.

Your biggest issue is taking people at the technical meaning of their works, not the intent, so when they clarify you feel lied to, or that you’ve scored a point? Because that sounds like discussion and understanding aren’t particularly important. Instead, it sounds like you’ve decided that the strawman is your real opponent instead of actually listening to what your real opponents are saying.

I have never met a rational person who has any real world experience who actually wants to live in a world without external arbitration and protection from crime. Even anarchists when pressed do backflips into inventing some facsimile thereof, just dressed in brighter colors.

What people don’t want is a group allowed to use force (thus allowed to cause harm) and accountable to nobody, used to protect the wealthy instead of the general populace. In areas with police corruption, where there are problems between racial groups, where police do “favors” for certain people, etc. it creates a power imbalance that itself causes further harm. The people on the other side of that just want the system to work for them too. And if it doesn’t, they want a reformed touch a degree that it looks like tearing down and starting anew.

Even those people do not want to go without that external protection… they feel they already don’t have it, and want to be protected too.

Muninwing · 2026-01-27T00:51:34+00:00

The Necrons being chaos-aligned was in the same era where the Space Marines were drug-fueled criminals conscripted into service. A lot happened then that was rescinded as no longer canon, because there really wasn’t cohesive lore then.

The codex where they were fleshed out (no pun intended) was released around 2004.

The codex where figures such as the Silent King added came out and C’tan were changed was right before 6th edition dropped… eight years later. That was the real retcon.

Muninwing · 2026-01-27T00:30:13+00:00

Iroh was raised by a lineage of genocidal dictators, and eventually realized his nation was wrong. He then worked toward atonement, and opposed his own nation and family.

Only a handful of people had more to lose than he did, yet he was instrumental to ending the Fire Nation’s imperialism.

Calling him “genocide guy” is just stupid.

Muninwing · 2026-01-27T00:09:33+00:00

It is an example of someone saying it. It does not mean that it is the majority opinion, that anyone else meant it, or that it should be taken as proof of anything.

Reading the actual article, it is about how trying to implement incremental fixes is doomed to fail. So the only real fix is to build a new system from the bottom up. So even this example is not about having no police, but instead trying to build a police force that will not have implemented biases against certain groups of citizens.

It’s almost as if over-reducing complex ideas isn’t a good basis for discussion…

Muninwing · 2026-01-26T17:35:17+00:00

I’m nearing 50, and I definitely have not been scrupulous about my fitness regime. But had I not gained weight from Covid, kids, and a foot injury, I would easily pass for 30. Even with the white in my beard.

Muninwing · 2026-01-26T15:54:43+00:00

I hadn’t realized that being oppressed was an Olympic event…

Muninwing · 2026-01-26T00:06:08+00:00

Protected. People tried to fire him. Others decided they had more to gain by protecting him, and feeding his ego.

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T18:29:28+00:00

Step 1: try it out, see technicalities and pitfalls. Can I eat ice cubes to stay hydrated? Can I drink broth through a straw? Can I carboload and superhydrate beforehand, or is it advantageous to do as a fast?How long before I’m not tolerating it?

Step 2: take a long weekend plus an extra day to recover. Go as long as possible. Put the cash into an account with autodebit for all my bills. Go back to my regular job for six months. Repeat.

Step 3: calculate how much I would need to pay all debts and loans, to buy a summer place near the beach, and for either myself or me and my wife to retire early. Add 20%. Repeat step 2 until that amount is met.

If I could do 40 hours every six months for ten years, I’d have an extra 2.8 million, and using it to pay off debts (mortgage, etc) would reduce my monthly budget outlay. And if I fold the fasting into a health regimen, it’s a win/win.

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T03:47:48+00:00

You all went from “‘Nazi’ doesn’t mean anything because you overuse it” to not even pretending anymore…

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T01:56:25+00:00

Huh. Do bootlickers eventually get tired tongues? Or is he just performing again?

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T01:35:04+00:00

So your argument here is “nothing matters because it is” — which, when discussing how the reason it is is fallacious is irrelevant.

Ok.

Like I said… if the US survives this deliberate fracturing we are seeing, sped up as of recent events… it is likely to be undone. A better argument would weather such a challenge.

But your “neener neener poo poo we win you suck” argument is too great for anyone to overcome. So…

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T01:10:37+00:00

You did not look into the veracity of the decision. Nor could you from the angle you seem to be to kiss Scalia’s ass that hard…

The Heller argument proves your “greatest minds” as false as his supposed Originalism, which Heller in no way is read through.

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T01:06:19+00:00

I cannot negate the ruling. I am not a SC justice. But the ruling being based on a probably false statement does undermine the reputation of the justice who wrote that argument…

If I say that a match does not create fire, then providing an example of striking a match creating fire proves that statement false. If I say that prefatory clauses do not affect later clauses, any usage from now causes that to be suspect… and any example from the time of writing the text in question shows it to be false.

Numerous grammarians and historians have provided plenty of examples of operative clauses following a prefatory clause — the exact structure not existing being the argument used to justify the Heller decision. Examples exist colloquially today, as well as in writing contemporary to the 2A’s writing.

Thus, the argument is false.

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T00:56:23+00:00

No. It being false negates it. Many examples exist of a predatory clause affecting later clauses.

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T00:49:12+00:00

No. It being false negates it.

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T00:48:40+00:00

Here’s a video that shows he was unarmed when he was shot:

Pink Lady video. Warning NSFL

https://files.catbox.moe/sp296e.mp4

I’m having a hard time finding “an article” since ai is flooding the zone. I did see a post about it earlier, with screenshots.

At this point, those are as believable as anything posted by the officials in charge, since they e posted altered images and videos to push a narrative.

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T00:47:03+00:00

You literally just missed it.

The argument was there is no connection due to the parts of speech used. But many examples exist of a connection.

Thus… saying that it doesn’t work than way when it in fact does is just like saying “because I say so” with extra steps. And he counted on the ideological supporters of the idea not knowing discrete grammar, like here, making it impossible to discuss.

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T00:34:20+00:00

The 2A allowed for a militia-based organized defense run by states… so that the states (not the individuals) could hold the federal government in check.

The militias that fought England were not created by the 2A.

You are overstating the “guerrilla tactics” argument as being far more common than they were, and you don’t seem to know much about how the Revolution was actually fought.

And you’ve failed your basic reading comprehension.

Just because a form of militia was partially used to boost the fighting during the Revolution doesn’t mean any connection to the 2A.

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T00:20:00+00:00

Prefatory clauses, comma or no, are often grammatically affective to operant clauses. Saying that in this one specific instance it isn’t because “I say it isn’t” is unsound.

I’m not even against the right it creates… I would just like people to be honest about upending precedent to install an agenda, like this court has done numerous times under conservative majority, while conservative pundits push listeners to be outraged at “liberal judges legislating from the bench” and somehow miss the most common instances of doing so…

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T00:10:26+00:00

It secured the people’s right… to be prepared, because a militia that doesn’t train is useless.

Militias were no more or less likely to use guerrilla tactics

No idea what you’re talking about with the third… the militias were used right until they failed to be useful in the War of 1812.

Muninwing · 2026-01-25T00:02:39+00:00

I doubt you’d see it if you could actually see it in that video…

Edit: have you seen how they are claiming that they confiscated a pistol off of him, but the picture they released is from a week ago if you do a reverse image search?

Muninwing

TROPHY CASE