grinreaper Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 There are good employees there? (I hope so....) Yes, there are some very good, dedicated VA employees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Yes, there are some very good, dedicated VA employees. Good to hear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 having this issue is a pain in the ass. When refueling equipment the new spouts often get in the way and funnels make situations worse. It has, however, drawn more sales of truck bed fuel cells We've been using Type II safety cans for as long as I can remember @ work... Going on 30 years. Only thing we are allowed to use. Yes, new residential cans are a PITA... BUT, these tried and true are as old as the hills. I have a 1.5 gallon I use @ home. Got it from my father inlaw, he's had it since the late 1960s. They still make them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 We've been using Type II safety cans for as long as I can remember @ work... Going on 30 years. Only thing we are allowed to use. Yes, new residential cans are a PITA... BUT, these tried and true are as old as the hills. I have a 1.5 gallon I use @ home. Got it from my father inlaw, he's had it since the late 1960s. They still make them. yeah. Let me get 20 of those to fill my 30 gallon tank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 (edited) yeah. Let me get 20 of those to fill my 30 gallon tank??? 20? Only 6. I have a 1.5 @ home. We use those (1.5 gallon safety can) @ work for the mixed-fuel applications only... Like chain saws, weed eaters, & snowblowers. That's a 5 gallon can right there in my pic posted above. That's all we use @ work since the enviros got rid of our 500 gallon underground gasoline tank. We still have the 1,000 gallon underground diesel tank though. We fill way more equipment daily then you do on the farm. Edited August 11, 2017 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 16, 2017 Share Posted August 16, 2017 WHAT COULD GO WRONG? Gov. Cuomo Wants a New Hate Crime Law. Would Police Use It to Suppress Protests? Enhanced sentences for rioting against a “protected class”? In two states, that now includes law enforcement. Cuomo should go back to fixing the subways and roads. And by “go back to” I mean “start.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 16, 2017 Share Posted August 16, 2017 (edited) WHAT COULD GO WRONG? Gov. Cuomo Wants a New Hate Crime Law. Would Police Use It to Suppress Protests? Enhanced sentences for rioting against a protected class? In two states, that now includes law enforcement. Cuomo should go back to fixing the subways and roads. And by go back to I mean start. Maybe you should start a thread: "Why Americans hate State Government." Edited August 16, 2017 by ExiledInIllinois Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 16, 2017 Share Posted August 16, 2017 WHAT COULD GO WRONG? Gov. Cuomo Wants a New Hate Crime Law. Would Police Use It to Suppress Protests? Enhanced sentences for rioting against a “protected class”? In two states, that now includes law enforcement. Cuomo should go back to fixing the subways and roads. And by “go back to” I mean “start.” Wouldn't stand up to judicial challenge. The Supremes weighed in on this in late June. Hate speech is protected speech, and given that the Constitution is the High Law of the Land, there is no law that can be passed to overrule it. Would require Constitutional Amendment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 16, 2017 Share Posted August 16, 2017 Wouldn't stand up to judicial challenge. The Supremes weighed in on this in late June. Hate speech is protected speech, and given that the Constitution is the High Law of the Land, there is no law that can be passed to overrule it. Would require Constitutional Amendment. So we should NOT hate Federal government then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 16, 2017 Share Posted August 16, 2017 Wouldn't stand up to judicial challenge. The Supremes weighed in on this in late June. Hate speech is protected speech, and given that the Constitution is the High Law of the Land, there is no law that can be passed to overrule it. Would require Constitutional Amendment. Or a properly written set of regulations issued through a department completely irrelevant to the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted August 16, 2017 Share Posted August 16, 2017 Like the EPA. They're great at telling people how to live, what they can and cannot do. I can see it now, they'll concoct some dummy data that proves that hate speech increases global warming. Ergo, it must be banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 16, 2017 Share Posted August 16, 2017 Like the EPA. They're great at telling people how to live, what they can and cannot do. I can see it now, they'll concoct some dummy data that proves that hate speech increases global warming. Ergo, it must be banned. I was thinking more Department of Labor. Issue some set of regs requiring the silencing of controversial speech in the work place or on the job, maybe piggy-back it on OSHA or something ("creates a dangerous work environment"), thereby requiring employers to fire employees who express controversial views in or out of the workplace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 I was thinking more Department of Labor. Issue some set of regs requiring the silencing of controversial speech in the work place or on the job, maybe piggy-back it on OSHA or something ("creates a dangerous work environment"), thereby requiring employers to fire employees who express controversial views in or out of the workplace. Anyone got a pen and a piece of paper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 17, 2017 Share Posted August 17, 2017 Anyone got a pen and a piece of paper? No paper. Got a phone, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 19, 2017 Share Posted August 19, 2017 I gotta a pair of knockoff eclipse glasses off of Amazon that seller can't verify even know the say "ISO" on them... Should I hate NASA (Fed gov't) for telling me they are no good. Will all you gov't haters be donning the knockoffs during the eclipse? What's the harm! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 19, 2017 Share Posted August 19, 2017 I gotta a pair of knockoff eclipse glasses off of Amazon that seller can't verify even know the say "ISO" on them... Should I hate NASA (Fed gov't) for telling me they are no good. Will all you gov't haters be donning the knockoffs during the eclipse? What's the harm! Personally speaking...the government doesn't have to tell me to NOT STARE AT THE SUN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 19, 2017 Share Posted August 19, 2017 Personally speaking...the government doesn't have to tell me to NOT STARE AT THE SUN. Exactly!!! I was being sarcastic and complex. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 19, 2017 Share Posted August 19, 2017 Exactly!!! I was being sarcastic and complex. :-) But you know some people are going to blind themselves staring at the eclipse, and they're going to do one (or both) of two things: 1) Blame the government for not protecting them from the sun, 2) Blame global warming. When they do, I will sarcastically reply to them with a "Thanks, Obama!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted August 19, 2017 Share Posted August 19, 2017 Wouldn't stand up to judicial challenge. The Supremes weighed in on this in late June. Hate speech is protected speech, and given that the Constitution is the High Law of the Land, there is no law that can be passed to overrule it. Would require Constitutional Amendment. Correct. However, the interpretation that hate speech which plausibly incites violence is indefensible under the First Amendment has been gaining steam of late. Which is appropriate IMO. There's a linear argument to be made for the concept of speech presenting 'clear and present danger' precedent and that of groups using rhetoric that directly contributes to the public safety's detriment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 19, 2017 Share Posted August 19, 2017 But you know some people are going to blind themselves staring at the eclipse, and they're going to do one (or both) of two things: 1) Blame the government for not protecting them from the sun, 2) Blame global warming. When they do, I will sarcastically reply to them with a "Thanks, Obama!" Or 3. Live like this guy: http://wsvn.com/news/us-world/man-who-burned-retina-looking-at-1960s-eclipse-warns-about-upcoming-eclipse/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts