Originally posted by -SpectraL
Seattle is safe once again. That's all that really matters.
even this goober at work was talking about it to this girl (she didn't know what the hell he was going on about) and I was like yeah this other dumbass that post constantly online thinks its going to happen and after that he just gives me dirty looks, ooooh weeeeeel
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny
at least hes honest about his crookery.
trump has got to be the most honest american precendent ive seen thus far.
Originally posted by vindicktive vinny
at least their honest this time about protecting freedom gasses instead freedom and democracy for their peoples.
under other president all these would be freedom and democracy and etc.
Originally posted by Assad
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad says that Donald Trump is the best president in US history because he has been open about his intentions to take possession of Syria’s oil.
“I tell you he’s the best American president. Why? Not because his policies are good, but because he’s the most transparent president,” Assad told Syrian state TV on Thursday during a wide-ranging interview.
Assad’s comments come days after Trump made a stunning suggestion following the raid that killed Islamic State group (IS) leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi that the US would be willing to fight for Syria’s oil.
“Look, we don’t want to keep soldiers between Syria and Turkey for the next 200 years. They’ve been fighting for hundreds of years. We’re out,” Trump said.
Originally posted by Greenspam
I couldn't find the video of what I believe was Syria a few years back (Because Youtube is fucking flooded with new videos of the past year) in which people were questioning if it was a Nuke that took out a bunker full of weapons. this thing kept going up and up and burning as a mushroom. there would of been no nuke flash because it came down as a bunker buster but like most blast that last a few seconds of flaming mushroom cloud, this thing kept going and going.
so It was meant to connect to the Minot story. I myself wondered how someone could accidently grab nukes and mount them
is this what you were referring to?
regardless it doesn't make sense to use a nuke on an ammo dump
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Nicholson , Acting P. J.
P. v. Lata
CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
At the sentencing hearing (which went untranscribed because it was held on the misdemeanor calendar), defendant objected to the registration requirement on a basis not specified in the court's minutes. The court granted probation in accordance with the agreed disposition, imposing the registration requirement. Defendant filed a notice of appeal without requesting a certificate of probable cause (CPC).
Defendant's sole argument on appeal is that the mandatory registration requirement for child annoyance violates his right to equal protection because section 290 does not also include solicitation for prostitution within its ambit even though the proscribed conduct could be similar. We affirm the order granting probation.
Our resolution of the issue does not require consideration of the factual basis for defendant's plea. We thus omit it.
DISCUSSION
The People initially contend the constitutionality of defendant's registration requirement is not an issue cognizable on appeal because he did not obtain a CPC. This mandatory consequence of his guilty plea is not a negotiable element of his plea, and therefore a challenge to it is not tantamount to an attack on the validity of his plea that would otherwise be subject to a CPC prerequisite. (People v. Hernandez (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 641, 647-648 [disapproved in People v. Picklesimer (2010) 48 Cal.4th 330, 338, fn. 4, as to holding that challenge to registration requirement can be via postjudgment motion]; cf. People v. McClellan (1993) 6 Cal.4th 367, 380 [imposition of registration requirement did not violate terms of plea because it is not a subject of negotiation]; see 6 Witkin & Epstein, Cal. Criminal Law (3d ed. 2011 supp.), Criminal Appeal, § 16, p. 67.)
The right to equal protection under the law (U.S. Const., 14th Amend.; Cal. Const., art. I, § 7), is the right to be treated similarly to those who are similarly situated. (People v. Jones (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 220, 227; People v. Hofsheier (2006) 37 Cal.4th 1185, 1199 (Hofsheier).) One who claims a violation of this right therefore has the essential prerequisite of demonstrating that a legislative classification affects two or more similarly situated groups differently. (Hofsheier, supra, 37 Cal.4th at p. 1199; In re Randy J. (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1497, 1506.)
"Legislative classification is the act of specifying who will and who will not come within the operation of a particular law." (Connerly v. State Personnel Bd. (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 16, 32.)
As an initial matter, we note that the principles of equal protection do not apply where identical conduct is subject to prosecution under more than one statute, resulting in different punishments for different defendants. This is simply a function of prosecutorial discretion. (People v. Honan (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 175, 183; People v. Taylor (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 318, 323; see Manduley v. Superior Court …
Originally posted by DietPiano
I'm torn between he's retarded and he did that on purpose to keep other people out and also because he can't moderate the 12 users here as it is.
Also the enhancementing of every other word is more and more proof that he wants us to get sick of it and stop posting altogether so he can spend the host money on beer.
To be completely fair this was never meant to be a Totse offshoot. Lanny only wanted a place to chill and talk to his friends, then his friends told the rest of us about it and now his hangout became work. He has no interest in the growth of the site or the community.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
I posted a response or retort and torn apart your replies in this thread but decided to erase them. Did you read them. I am sure the ones who did know I have a point. I even twlked wbout my esperiences in life with close calls or situations that showed me signs my hypothesis or the original hypothesis of this thread has some barring.
Dude. It sucks for you that you're attracted to little girls but that doesnt change the fact that they're off limits. Just forget it. Ninety million threads here isnt gonna change anything. It does nothing but reiterate how sick your brain is, as if it isnt already abundantly clear. You're not going to change anyone's minds. Like Caspo said, its demonstratably unhealthy the level of infatuation you exhibit. Move on. Or drift into the sun. Thank you.
User was banned for saying the taboo phrase "girl"!
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
it's kind of funny to see people in the west rail so hard against (their perception of) the social credit system when we can literally be fired and blacklisted for making off-colour jokes on social media
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
