Lurker > WingsOfGood

I'd like to think if there's a god they would be benevolent enough to not care

just wait until the delta and lambda variant do the fusion dance.

it would have been if everyone would get fucking vaccinated and stay off social media to be indoctrinated into thinking its dangerous.

Delta is vaccine resistant too. Lambda wont be scary if you have the vaccine, you just might catch COVID, but not die.

In laboratory experiments, they found that three mutations in Lambda's spike protein, known as RSYLTPGD246-253N, 260 L452Q and F490S, help it resist neutralization by vaccine-induced antibodies

There is no evidence of breakthrough infections afaik

You can buy Castle GreySkull right now for $75 MSRP. Figures retail for $15.


My new Trap Jaw (bought in March) vs my original 1983 Trap Jaw.

Everything I see put Castle Grayskull at $26-$30 at the time, and that would mean it topped out around $80 in todays money. Sounds about right.

I HIGHLY dispute the way this documentary frames the end of the line. He-Man wasnt killed by too many characters. It was straight up murdered by Transformers and GI Joe. The documentary doesnt even mention that. But the cartoon was buried to like weekday mornings by the end of 86. And Filmation had been horrible at introducing toys into the cartoon. Once their on-air presence started to fade, the new toy lines moved in. Personally, I was done with He-Man by 85 and so were all my friends. 1986 was probably the most competition the toy market has ever seen in terms of new lines and he- man got killed soon after.

Awesome documentary, but not the full story.

https://youtu.be/0rddrwvJThQ

Heres the video. Battle Cat originated in the Tarzan toy line, not Big Jim. Big Jim imported him just like He-Man.

The Toys that Made Us, right? I enjoyed the LEGO, Star Trek, and Barbie >_> episodes.

My parents sold them all at a garage sale. They were all pretty much in excellent condition.

Uh. If hes mint on card.

I had all the Heman, GI Joe, and Transformer action figures and between me and my brother we had all the vehicles and forts.

Something about this is a myth but I dont remember what it was. I think maybe that tiger was in Big Jim but it originated in a toy line before it. Maybe. But I do know that cat mold has a ton of repaints.

Speaking of $20. The new GreySkull is on clearance for $24 if you can find anything more than an empty tag.

At LSU there is a giant fancy bronze Tiger statue....

and it was clearly based EXACTLY on the He-Man toy xD

Without having read much, I am going to come in for the following legal drive-by regarding post 240:

One, those cases are from several different circuits, which are not a unified jurisdiction and do have differences in case law and interpretation. They also do not account for individual state differences re: Fourth Amendment analogues.

Second, Fourth Amendment cases are so heavily fact dependent that, outside of broad principles of law set forth, they are not of much, if any, individual value as "binding precedent," especially when issued from an intermediate appellate court.

We do? And the fact is whether hes drunk or not. The police DIDNT know that but were under suspicion that he was. Hence, a legal investigation. Hence, why its lawful.
Now youre just going in left field with racist people blah blah. Im done man. You just keep adding questions to everything despite me answering it

Dude youre just strawmanning now holy fuck. Its not a crime to do that. Its NOT advised to do this. But you are well within your legal right to do it. Ive responded to many calls where a person is following a drunk driver. That shit kills, a lot

This is not the same I already explained this to you in my last post. If this was true, then police calls would never happen. Because guess what? People really dont call the police on themselves

Thats kind of the point of them starting the investigation. But he decided to be belligerent. Believe it or not. People take drunk drivers seriously

Maybe I'm missing something, but the words of just one guy don't sound like probable cause to me.

Its hard to be anonymous when he follow the drunk driver home and waited for police. Regardless. This is not the same comparison as somebody saying I think this random guy is a drug dealer. This person is actually a witness to a crime.

why are you like. Like you know youre wrong

I'm curious what this was supposed to accomplish. They can't even prove reckless driving at that point. What, were they going to ask him? How was this intended to play out?

are you comparing an anonymous tip a person reporting a drunk/reckless driver and following him???? OP just stop

So help me find a good woman who'll help uplift my life.

https://casetext.com/analysis/search-and-seizure-terry-stop-what-constitutes-a-seizure

United States v. Johnson, 620 F.3d 685 (6th Cir. 2010)
The police received a call that there were suspicious people at an apartment complex. The police went to the scene and saw the defendant, carrying a bag, walking calmly from the yard of the complex to a car. The police ordered him to stop; he kept walking. The police ordered him to stop again; he kept walking until he arrived at the car, opened the passenger door, threw the bag in and then stood still at the open door. The Sixth Circuit held that when he finally stopped, he had been seized. Because there was no articulable suspicion to justify the seizure, the resulting frisk and search was unconstitutional and evidence should have been suppressed.

United States v. Fox, 600 F.3d 1253 (10th Cir. 2010)
The defendants wife pulled up to her house and was approached by a police officer who was conducting surveillance of the house (in particular, the defendant). The officer entered the wifes car and directed her to drive across the street to a parking lot. She was questioned and then asked for consent to search her car. Ultimately, she consented to a search of the house. The Tenth Circuit held that the wife was detained; there was no basis for the detention and the consent to search was the product of this detention. The gun found in the house, therefore, should have been suppressed at the defendants trial.

United States v. Johnson, 427 F.3d 1053 (7th Cir. 2005)
The police received an anonymous tip that the defendant was a cocaine dealer and that he lived at a particular location. The police went to the defendants house and when the defendants girlfriend came out, she was asked by the police to knock on the door. She did so and the defendant came to the door. The police talked to him briefly, after which he turned around and started walking away, back down the hall. The police pulled out a gun, pointed it at the ground, and cautioned that this was a matter of officer safety. The defendant stopped in his tracks and returned to the door. He then consented to a search. The Seventh Circuit held, (1) this did amount to a detention; (2) there was no articulable suspicion supporting the detention; (3) the consent to search was a fruit of the unlawful detention.

United States v. Hall, 978 F.2d 616 (10th Cir. 1992)
Based on a tip, the police met the defendant when her train arrived at the station. She was asked for consent to search her luggage which she refused. She had purchased a one-way ticket from Flagstaff to Harrisburg, Pa. She appeared nervous when questioned. On this basis, the officers seized the luggage, but allowed the defendant to leave. This was unlawful. In order to seize the luggage, the police must have the same level of information reasonable suspicion as is required to seize the person. United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696 (1983). The facts in this case did not amount to reasonable suspicion.

Seeing a pattern here. Sounds like the officers going on a tip to detain someone are breaking the law based on case law.

I need a woman like this

I can't tell if it's a willful misinterpretation or just a plain lack of knowledge that compels people to say that you have the "right to defend yourself" against police attempting to make a lawful arrest.