You say this, but have you ever tried to drive a car (sober) that is packed full of drunk people? It’s not easy, and they all might just get you pulled over anyway.

Outright prohibition never works. They have to get a lot more clever to work against addiction.

Reading the article, I see why this is a problem to be addressed. At the same time, I’m not sure how in the world you would directly “fix” this other than outright banning unruly customers after they cause problems.

The best course of action might be to quietly work with restaurant managers in major airports to start watering down mixed drinks, and serve lower-gravity beer and wine, on heavy travel days. I’m mostly sure this is how amusement parks operate; they just need to consult with Disney or SixFlags on this one. The threat of airlines (or the airport) banning heavy restaurant customers might be motivation enough. That way, restaurants make more money, airlines have (maybe) less nonsense to deal with, and there’s no documented limit on beverages.

Oh. That’s a good one.

Wish Version Iron Man

Oh that’s good.

I also like: Rebate Rockefeller.

Exactly. And while we’re educating the forum here, Wikipedia has the details on the loophole that circumvents this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_show_loophole#Provenance

Sometimes referred to as the Brady bill loophole,[9] the Brady law loophole,[10] the gun law loophole,[11] or the private sale loophole,[12][13][14] the term refers to a perceived gap in laws that address what types of sales and transfers of firearms require records and or background checks, such as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act.[15] Private parties are not legally required by federal law to: ask for identification, complete any forms, or keep any sales records, as long as the sale is not made in interstate commerce (across state lines) and does not fall under purview of the National Firearms Act. In addition to federal legislation, firearm laws vary by state.[16]

I am not a lawyer. I do not sell firearms.

The gist I get is that this opens up enough loopholes to permit unlicensed mules/fences on either side of the transaction. Depending on what political leanings and circumstances are in play, this legal framework might actually encourage that behavior.

I understand that the situation is not great and the stakes are very, very real.

At the same time it’s kind of amazing how this whole affair has this “improvised tube-sock & axle-grease sticky bomb” perseverance to it.

Solid move. After you dislocate your shoulder a few times, you get used to it.

Now this is Marxism I can get behind.

:: wiggles cigar ::

Whether or not he’d let me stand back there is another story.

Yeah, he is either stupid or desperate.

I’ll pick the middle option: Putin is high on his own supply.

The man made it clear that dissent will be met with swift and gruesome consequences. This is a sure-fire recipe for surrounding yourself with yes-men that are not smart enough to get the hell out. And BTW, that’s always a career where everyone’s last promotion is “pavement inspector”, and training starts immediately at an open 6th floor window. So there’s some cocky, can’t-guage-risk-for-a-damn people mixed in there too. The result is a bunch of decisions from the head-of-state that only make sense between those in his court, and fail to hold up to scrutiny outside those walls.

Because Putin is fucking head of it.

Thank you for taking a risk by posting here and speaking truth to power. People like you give me hope.

China might figure this one out first. In fact, China is so far ahead of everyone, they even built entire abandoned cities before there was any issue with birth rates.

It’s like watching a speedrun: Capitalism any%.

Next? Some of them have to be thinking “wait, this is a communist country, isn’t it?”

Just don’t tell their investors who are clearly pushing to make it a social media hub.

Edit: it’s the second-to-last place I would ever consider for that purpose. Right after Venmo.

This is a good point. My interactions with the Fediverse over the last few months has been sublime. Maybe users here are just proportionally more active?

Numbers are nice, but they’re not everything. Yeah, we could onboard 2 billion lurkers, but how would that improve anything?

I think this says more about oil oligarchs than coke dealers, but yes.

In much the same way, I wonder if Chinese scientists and other non-party-officers were actually trying to warn the rest of us back in 2020, by all stating the same exact party line loudly and often. Kind of a cross-cultural accident as we’re not used to the subtleties of living there?