COVID created a giant fire which (1) provides a way to bypass the laws, and (2) excuse their incompetence when the results cause even more problems, saying "Well, we did it in a hurry."
Not a conspiracy. A verifiable observation.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
I just replied about this....is it a national standard? Who made this fact? What laws back it up? What legal definitions are there on record....keep trying
So some article on a webpage is definition of legal advice and restrictions eh...
Still not enough of a definition, is a 24,999 volt gun just a toy? Are there scientific studies showing what is dangerous and what's not? That's part of the qualification for the law.
There is none, hence why this is such a gray area and hard issue...my point exactly. Whos allowed to say what use something is. Is a electric toy at 10000 volts different enough than 50k? You can make guns that are toys, though currently none of them shoot bullets. Oil has pointed out several times why the law is bad cause they don't give specifics. Without specifics we can only guess or take our chances in court. Vague laws tend to be un-enforceable.
Now I see why sarcasm is hard on this forum. If you didn't get that joke dang.
According to my research, the smallest voltage possible to purchase in a taser
while still being effective is 25,000 volts. To see more of the specific differences
in the effects of weak and strong tasers, check out some videos online.
So, how many volts are in a taser? Although there are several different types of
tasers on the market, the average voltage found in many tasers is around 50,000
volts. However, if you are not very comfortable using a taser with that much voltage,
there are several smaller, weaker options available on the market.
There's different voltage and devices. Not all electric guns/devices are the same.
My entire discussion with oil was not to call them Tasers and Stun guns but electric guns/devices. Oil enlightened me that I was using the incorrect term because the law covers them all.
We live in a capitalist society, if a law passes in a state of 1,000,000 potential customers its only a matter of time before a company comes up with a solution. We have seen this countless times with failed attempts at gun control or other regulations.
Because its designed for use against another human not sure but this would not qualify as intended to harm....its intended to pleasure
Since 2001, more than 500 people in the United States have died after law enforcement officers used this weapon against them. A study published this week by the American Heart Association’s Circulation Journal confirms that the misuse of a Taser can cause sudden cardiac arrest and death.
Only he would go infront a judge and try to use that argument. Then pout and stomp his feet once the judge says try again. Probably move goalpost too.
I stated that the intended purpose is moot in HI for EGs. So if a "toy" is made is irrelevant. Same goes with prods. Guess he did an omni and not read past the first sentence.
If you can read, I've said many things like a toy. It makes a cool sound and lights. Manufacturers can edit the use case for any item they sell. For example a cattle prod. I've seen electric arc toys. There are electric lighters.
Purchase X electric device today: This device is not designed for use against humans or animals and a display device only.
I will respond to any posts I deem necessary, its up to you if you wish to reply.
Still not what I asked for. I need a case showing possession not use. They used a electric device in a offensive way. A pocket knife that is used in that way would be considered a deadly weapon. But it's not considered to be one when carried.
ACLU says Second Amendment is racist
According to the ACLU, “anti-Blackness” led to the Second Amendment’s inclusion in the Bill of Rights, and has led to the “unequal and racist application of gun laws.”
Nobody cares what you might or might not have done (hypothetically). I'm telling what happened.
What I deduced from that (as did my SIL) was that the doctor was following policies that SOMEBODY in his office set, and he was unable to provide a logical reason for the policy.
It demonstrates that the sheeple exist at all levels, even the doctors that we are supposed to trust to give us the correct info.
How many times have we been told, the vaccine decision should be between you and your doctor? In this case, the doctor couldn't answer a basic question regarding vaccine effectiveness -- that didn't even touch on its safety.
Stop arguing. This is not your topic, nor your story. You were not there.
I did you completely missed the world few which 3>1.
Which also means around 30-40% of the world population if 100% got vaccinated.
If, implies a possibility. I'll give oil all my guns if Jesus and cthulhu shook hands in front of a world audience. Does this make this statement an authentic possibility? Its pretty obvious what he ment and he was wrong.
The issue here is that repurposed drugs solve the problem quickly and affordably.