5-Points

Sure. There are outliers, of course, but for the most part, a pitbull raised in the right environment will grow up to become no more aggressive or ill tempered than a Labrador raised in the same environment.

Wordle 997 5/6* 🟩🟩 🟩🟩 🟩🟩 🟨🟩🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Framed #732 🟥 🟩 https://framed.wtf I had a 50/50 shot on that opening frame.

Wordle 996 3/6* 🟩🟨 🟩🟨🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Framed #731 🟥 🟩 https://framed.wtf

Back to Back! Ross needed to hold Blaney off for half a car length bro. That was close.

To me, blaming a dog for attacking somebody is sort of like blaming a gun for shooting somebody. The gun, if left alone, wouldn't shoot anybody. The dog, if raised properly, wouldn't attack anybody. I understand that guns and dogs are different. One is inanimate and the other isn't. But both the gun and the dog need outside influence to be dangerous.

No. Plenty of bad dog owners and bad kid owners in this world. All of them should be punished.

It's not the dog, it's the owner. There are plenty of docile pits in the world.

I really wanted to start Shrub here but that new pit crew made me swap him out.

I don't have to have personal feelings for someone in order to want justice to be served. The industry provides the "expert", in part, to train the actors on the safe handling of firearms. Baldwin didn't follow his training and a woman ended up dead as a result. He bears some responsibility for that. Whether it amounts to jail time or not remains to be seen, but I doubt it will. People don't always go to jail for negligent homicide, which is what I think this was. My guess is he gets probation.

Wordle 995 5/6* 🟩🟨 🟨🟩 🟩🟩🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Framed #730 🟥 🟥 🟥 🟥 🟥 🟥 https://framed.wtf

It makes no sense.

Speaking of illogical and unnecessary, CA now requires a BGC to purchase ammo. Yeah, ammo.

It's state law. Mandatory 10 day waiting period on all firearm purchases. I might be able to understand that for first time purchasers but what logical reason is there to make a guy who has legally purchased 12 guns, and never committed a crime, wait 10 days before taking possession of his 13th? It's illogical and unnecessary.

No sh!t? I know that's the case in many states but MA is supposed to be CA East when it comes to gun laws. It's like paying full price to put something on layaway here.

Like you said, we'll see. He isn't entirely guilty but he isn't completely innocent either.

Hopefully the I in "NICS" works in SC. Here in CA it takes 10 days.

True.

Agreed. I'll take it one step further. There shouldn't have been live rounds on the set. I'm no fan of Alec Baldwin. I think he's a focking doosh. That said, I don't think the guy should be found solely responsible for this woman's death. However, I think he was negligent with regards to his handling of the firearm in his possession. Whether or not he believed the gun was loaded with blanks is irrelevant. He knew, or should've known, that even guns loaded with blanks can be deadly and handled that gun accordingly. He clearly did not.

I haven't read the whole bill either but this clause would indicate that mentally ill people would not be legally allowed to own or carry. "allows eligible citizens 18 and older to.." Mentally defective people are precluded by federal law from purchasing firearms.

A visual inspection of the loaded weapon might not have been enough. He would've had to have been able to feel the weight of the blank vs a live round and known the difference. His responsibility lies in pointing the gun at her and pulling the trigger. Which he had to have done, whether he meant to or not.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is what is known as common sense gun law.

He could've not "aimed" but merely pointed the gun in her direction and got "lucky." He had to have pulled the trigger though. Revolvers don't fire without the hammer being pulled back, which rotates the cylinder to align the next round, so when the hammer is released (trigger is pulled), the primer is struck, which ignites the powder, that causes the projectile to exit the barrel. If he'd dropped the gun and it landed on the hammer, that could've discharged the round. But that's not what is being claimed. He's claiming he simply pointed the gun towards her and it went off. That just isn't possible. He may escape justice in this case but he definitely bears some culpability. I'm not saying it was intentional. But, based on the limited training he received, he should've known better than to do what he did.