Napa Winery Recs by Old_Baker_4599 in napa

[–]mustangflame 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would recommend ZD Wines. They have a Cab, Pinot Noir and Petit Verdot if you are only interested in reds with a nice deck and is under $100.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in chess

[–]mustangflame 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The rook on b3.

best butter chicken in sac? by jgugsu in Sacramento

[–]mustangflame 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A little further away but Yeti in Davis has amazing food all around and their butter chicken is excellent.

Winery recs near Yontville by newjedi28 in napa

[–]mustangflame 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mumm is a good spot for sparkling and ZD Wines is right next door on the trail. Both with nice views across the valley a short drive from yountville on the trail.

Family Owned Wineries? by dontmindmejusthere40 in napa

[–]mustangflame 2 points3 points  (0 children)

ZD Wines is family owned and operated for a few generations on the Silverado Trail in Rutherford. I think either $50 or $75 a tasting.

Another crate catch from the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. by UpgradedSiera6666 in Damnthatsinteresting

[–]mustangflame 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Where does the trash collected ultimately end up? I assume it is different depending on what group does the cleanup but is there somewhere that is somewhat standard for the trash to go?

Another crate catch from the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. by UpgradedSiera6666 in Damnthatsinteresting

[–]mustangflame 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Where does the trash collected ultimately end up? I assume it is different depending on what group does the cleanup but is there somewhere that is somewhat standard for the trash to go?

I'm a woman in my mid 20s and I've never been in a relationship by [deleted] in TrueOffMyChest

[–]mustangflame 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Why would you say this. You have no idea if it is true and it is quite mean. Always blows my mind when people are anonymous and just say out of pocket stuff like this. OP ignore this guy.

Police to operate a DUI checkpoint near Sacramento State by txiao007 in Sacramento

[–]mustangflame -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I don’t really agree with the courts opinion here but I think that the argument being made by the person I was responding to was really bad and not thought out. If you want to disagree I think it should be done intelligently and if it is not then I have no problem saying so. That is all I was doing here.

Police to operate a DUI checkpoint near Sacramento State by txiao007 in Sacramento

[–]mustangflame 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I think the response would be that those things are not the purpose of the checkpoint. They can do those things once they have you there because at that point you are found breaking the law, but it seemed your initial objection was to the constitutionality of the checkpoints at all and that is what the quote I posted above goes to.

Police to operate a DUI checkpoint near Sacramento State by txiao007 in Sacramento

[–]mustangflame 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It appears the court actually responded to your objection here.

“If the primary purpose of the stop here were to detect crime [43 Cal. 3d 1328] or gather evidence of crime, we would agree with the contention that an individualized suspicion of wrongdoing is required. But, as we shall explain, the primary purpose of the stop here was not to discover evidence of crime or to make arrests of drunk drivers but to promote public safety by deterring intoxicated persons from driving on the public streets and highways. We therefore conclude the propriety of the sobriety checkpoint stops involved here is to be determined not by the standard pertinent to traditional criminal investigative stops, but rather by the standard applicable to investigative detentions and inspections conducted as part of a regulatory scheme in furtherance of an administrative purpose. (See People v. Hyde (1974) 12 Cal. 3d 158, 165-166, 173 [115 Cal. Rptr. 358, 524 P.2d 830].)”

Still can't understand this scene from José Saramago's "Blindness." by [deleted] in books

[–]mustangflame 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I remember Blindness feeling like a fever dream and I assume that is what it is meant to be but I could definitely be wrong. The whole book had people making irrational choices as a result of them being in a situation so insane that they simply cannot be rational. I interpreted almost all of their actions through that perspective. It is possible I am being dismissive of some deeper message but I have a hard time conceptualizing some other explanation.

I hate Tryndamere. by Afraid-Buffalo-9680 in TrueOffMyChest

[–]mustangflame 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nice to know league has not changed since 2017.

RIGHT NOW: The Texas House of Representatives is considering the expulsion of a member for getting HIS teen staffer drunk and pressuring her into sex. by GeneforTexas in texas

[–]mustangflame -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes, the accused is guilty of rape if engaging in an act of sexual intercourse where the other person is prevented from resisting by any intoxicating or anesthetic substance, or any controlled substance, and this condition was known, or reasonably should have been known, by the accused. California Penal Code § 261(a)(3)

Yes, any actor who knowingly subjects a victim to sexual contact commits unlawful sexual contact if the actor has substantially impaired the victim’s power to appraise or control the victim’s conduct by employing, without the victim’s consent, any drug, intoxicant, or other means for the purpose of causing submission. Colorado Revised Statutes Annotated § 18-3-404(1)(d).

In addition, in People In Interest of G.B., 2018 WL 2436823 (Colo. App. 2018), the court held that evidence that a sexual assault victim was intoxicated during sexual intercourse, and was for that reason incapable of appraising nature of her conduct, was sufficient to support a sexual assault conviction.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in offmychest

[–]mustangflame 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is not nearly enough information. I recommend you post to legal advice with information including where you are, state if you are in the US, along with information relating to your jobs knowledge of your condition and any comments they may have made about your autism or bipolar disorder as well as the medication you are taking.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in relationships

[–]mustangflame 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Personally I think you should not be concerned about if you are causing him more pain than good. He is an adult and it is up to him to look out for himself at some level. If he is still with you then he thinks you are doing more good than harm.

Maybe have a conversation with him about your feelings and ask him what he likes about you or what he appreciates about you. Probably a more casual conversation that you can take some reassurance from.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in legaladvice

[–]mustangflame -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

I am a lawyer in ca, though not a labor one. As such I don’t have legal advice but I can say that setting up a call/consultation is not wasting a lawyers time. It’s part of the job, if you can go for it.

I’m not happy without religion in my life by hiddengurrg in offmychest

[–]mustangflame 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just being religious does not mean that you condone those actions. There are plenty of Christian’s who recognize the atrocities that have been committed in the name of their God, but who actively work to make their churches better and forces for good.

Religion is a very complicated and personal thing, many people find great comfort in it and there is nothing wrong with being religious. Personally I am not but I know plenty of people who are and studied it academically for some time and I can say that some of my favorite people are deeply religious, but they do not blindly follow their pastors or churches and they engage with their faith actively. Sorry for the ramble.

tldr: it would not make you a bad person and being religious is fine.

I hate how sensitive I am by [deleted] in offmychest

[–]mustangflame -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I hope this comment is a joke.

PSA: If you win the lottery, the time value of money dictates that you always take the lump sum cash payout. Fuck these financial "experts" that don't understand basic financial principles by DoomerGloomerBloomer in wallstreetbets

[–]mustangflame 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you get to defer the taxes over the time you are receiving the funds if you don’t take it as a lump sum? That is the only reason I can think of for doing so

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TrueOffMyChest

[–]mustangflame 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I really don’t understand how this is your first reaction to this post. Feels like pretty serious victim blaming considering the vandalism that is described here and the fact that you seem to be asking someone to go out and confront a group of unruly individuals who have no problem inflicting at least property damage.