Repeal the Second Amendment

i do not recommend biting the squirrel tails.

preserving a trophy from your kill endows u with its power; my bro now has the strength of many squirrels

The dark gritty Squirrel Girl adaptation no one asked for.

How To Tell If Your Cat Is Secretly Trying To Kill You

One of those *responsible gun owners* we always hear about

a true yeoman of our republic

i mean, like, freal tho

not that there’s anything anyone can actually do to make it happen. this pot of frog water became frog soup became frog sludge became frog leather many moons ago.

but still

i would like for people to stop being murdered like this

i would like for it to be incredibly difficult, grueling, as close to impossible as possible for a random person to kill lots of other people

it doesn’t make sense that this isn’t everyone else’s default opinion

somehow i’m still not used to things not making sense

cat otm

o misbegotten amendment

SLATER SCOOP: Exclusive video of road-rage shooting in Miami from in-car camera.

The shooter seen here was arrested and is awaiting trial. He told cops the other driver fired first.

(Warning: Language and gunfire) pic.twitter.com/10vDVEwBbw

— Andy Slater (@AndySlater) January 28, 2022

The Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office has dropped charges against Eric Popper, the driver who pulled out a handgun and shot at another driver through his own car on I-95 in Miami-Dade County. The road rage incident occurred in June 2021 but took a wild twist in January 2022. Dashcam footage from Popper’s Toyota Venza was given to the media. Popper’s attorney said the footage showed his client’s actions were in self-defense. The state attorney’s office agreed.

In 2021, Eric Popper cut off another driver while driving to work on I-95. The other driver began tailgating and honking his horn at the 30-year-old. Popper brake-checked him. The other driver pulled up alongside Popper, and this is where accounts diverged. The Florida Highway Patrol stated the other driver threw a water bottle. Popper claims it was gunfire, and he returned fire in kind. Whatever struck Popper’s crossover SUV can’t be seen in the video footage.

Eric Popper faced charges including aggravated assault with a firearm after the road rage incident. However, the Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office recently dropped the charges against Popper. Popper’s attorney Robert Gershman has said that the charge was dropped because of Florida’s Stand Your Ground Law. Gershman told WPLG, “I think under the stand your ground law, Mr. Popper was perfectly reasonable and justified in his actions. There was no question when you look and listen to the facts of the case, Mr. Popper was shot at.”

Popper has told the media that he wants to move on. He told WPLG, “Hindsight is 20/20. There are always things we can look back and say we wish we could have done differently. Definitely, I would have done —would be to not have pumped my brakes. I would have taken another tactic. Definitely try to de-escalate a little better.” Hopefully, Popper wishes that he would not have pulled a handgun in traffic.

There was no question... Mr. Popper was shot at.

Here's a question. Any bullet holes in Mr. Popper's SUV?

so weird that at the very beginning of all this, he's singing "doot doot doot doot! gonna suck my d. gonna suck my d!" one minute later he's trying to kill someone

What is the source of the video?

his own dashcam, i think, given to the media in january 2022

throw the book at this fucker what is the question exactly

fucking violent psychopath loser, go to jail thanks

pulling a gun because you’re mad at traffic, has to be one of the easiest tests for dangerous terrible people

yeah. didn't even get charged, in the end

He had his gun out and ready before the guy ever came up even with him. And he was spraying bullets. He's a danger to himself and others.

it seems really obvious to me, too. i don't know. repeal the second amendment

there’s cool laws in the cool states that say you can just blast away however much you want if you feel bad that day or whatever, what are you gonna do

Jeb should be charged with thousands of manslaughters for signing SYG into law.

I know it's merely semantics, but how is this even considered road rage? I get the impression, given how disturbingly calm this guy is throughout the altercation, that this is not the first time this has happened. Pretty fucking chilling

A Black teenager was shot in the head in Kansas City, Mo., after showing up at the wrong house to pick up his siblings, lawyers for his family said.

Family members identified the victim online as Ralph Yarl, a 16-year-old high school junior.

Kansas City Police were called to a residence shortly before 10 p.m. on Thursday where the teenager was shot by a homeowner, Police Chief Stacey Graves said in a news conference Sunday. The teenager was transported to a hospital to be treated for his injuries, Graves said. She did not name the victim.

Police said the teenager’s parents asked him to pick up his siblings at a residence on 115th Terrace, in the city’s northeast, but that he instead went to a residence on 115th Street, the Kansas City Star reported.

Civil rights attorneys Ben Crump and Lee Merritt, who are representing Yarl and his family, said in a statement that Yarl “is alive and recovering” but that he has severe injuries. They said he was “shot twice and struck in the head and arm by an unidentified white male assailant,” and that Yarl was unarmed. The Washington Post could not independently verify those claims.

Yarl rang the wrong doorbell and was shot twice. how could this be understood as anything other than the homeowner, hearing a doorbell at night, grabbing their gun and prioritizing "kill"

Asked whether the shooting may have been racially motivated, the police chief said, “the information that we have now, it does not say that that is racially motivated. That’s still an active investigation. But as a chief of police, I do recognize the racial components of this case.”

no, i don't think you do

if it was truly still an active investigation, you could have simply said "we are investigating all possibilities", not lead with "it doesn't look like it". I'm sure this will be an unbiased, fair investigation.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/accused-shooter-in-kansas-city-shooting-of-black-teen-who-went-to-the-wrong-house-is-white-man-in-his-80s/ar-AA19WVkR?ocid=iehp&cvid=f95cbb1b28204e0889f6331eedef8dba&ei=9

“White man in his 80s” being invited for a speaking slot at the Republican National Convention.

Picking up siblings while black. Yes, the U.S. is a dystopia.

Judge Carlton Reeves has issued his decision in the felon-in-possession case. He rules that, under Bruen, permanently disarming people convicted of felonies violates the Second Amendment. The 77-page decision is absolutely fascinating. https://t.co/aVLee5se3s pic.twitter.com/quWEM5iwXQ

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) June 28, 2023

this is so grotesquely bleak lol

is there a left wing troll out there ...trolly enough to take this all the way?

so can anyone parse this development for me?

"Hawaii Supreme Court handed down a unanimous opinion on Wednesday declaring that its state constitution grants individuals absolutely no right to keep and bear arms outside the context of military service. Its decision rejected the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment, refusing to interpolate SCOTUS’ shoddy historical analysis into Hawaii law. Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern discussed the ruling on this week’s Slate Plus segment of Amicus; their conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity."

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/02/hawaii-supreme-court-guns-case-rebuke-scalia.html

I wish Hawaii and Puerto Rico could gain total autonomy away from the States

as usual, your posts suck and are unhelpful

I think what's being said is that from a legal perspective it has limited reach, but it's part of a beginning trend of state Supreme Courts rebuking SCOTUS and ruling the opposite of Federal precedent, while also calling out SCOTUS's bad reasoning.

In this case, it won't do much legally because the SCOTUS interpretation still supercedes, but in cases like abortion, where Federal law states something isn't a right and state Supreme Court says "well, it is in this state", it can have more impact...even if temporary.

Really feels like mostly a protest, and one I wholeheartedly support

it's part of a beginning trend of state Supreme Courts rebuking SCOTUS and ruling the opposite of Federal precedent, while also calling out SCOTUS's bad reasoning

The entire southern tier of US states ignored Brown v Board of Education for a couple of decades. The rest of the USA didn't do remarkably better at school integration, but they didn't have state segregation laws they kept actively enforcing like the southern states did.