When someone says someone is legally trespassing read it as “legally [speaking they are] trespassing”. At least in most cases.

Pedantic tangent:

You could lawfully trespass on the land of another (with permission). There’s 4 elements to the tort of trespass to land. 1) You act volitionally. 2) You intend to occupy that space, are substantially certain that will happen as a result of your actions, or you intend another intentional tort granting transfered intent. 3) But for your act their property wouldn’t have been invaded. 4) Their property has been invaded.

In civil law a trespass to land doesn’t consider whether you have permission or not to determine if you trespassed. They would determine that you did infact trespass but you have the defense of having done so with the privilege to do so granted by the owner. Meaning you did trespass but did so only in a manner appropriate under law.

No problem, don’t forget to enjoy the constitution/citizenship (if applicable).

Thank you for sharing this clear and succinct comment. Looked through the article and didn’t see it formated so clearly.

Possibly a rule 2/6 (opinion) issue. Not sure if you guys care on an article by article basis or just by source. Headline alone is pretty charged language.

BoR are the first 10/27 amendments. They were all ratified in 1791. Federalists thought that the structural elements laid out in the main document would protect people’s rights but Antifederalists insisted on codifying specific rights and the BoR was a promise to get more people on board with the idea of the Constitution.

Last year, North Carolina Republicans introduced the REACH Act, an acronym for “Reclaiming College Education on America’s Constitutional Heritage.” The bill required undergraduates to take at least three credit hours in American government and read a series of major U.S. history documents, from the Declaration of Independence to Martin Luther King Jr.’s 1963 “Letter from Birmingham Jail.” They would also have to pass a final exam worth 20% of the final grade.

Per the article

I remember my college had a suicide awareness day where among other things they told people to tell their suicidal friends to call the hotline if they felt suicidal.

Now imagine you are that person and you reach out to a friend for help only to have them tell you to call someone else in a canned speech you were told to tell others.

I’ve seen designs that only have one metal component a nail. There’s several 22lr designs that use entirely printed barrels. They won’t last as long and need to be designed around the material qualities, but do function safely.

There’s also a few designs that can be made with parts from hardware stores without any particularly expensive machinery (like mills or lathes). People can even rifle barrels at home through electro-chemical machining which isn’t as complicated as it sounds.

As a other commenter mentioned machinegun is a legal definition in the US, for a firearm capable of automatic or burst fire.

Here the author is referring to Glock switches an aftermarket design that exploits the design of semiautomatic Glock pistols to convert them to be automatic.

My understanding is that typically most of them tend to be ones bought online and shipped from China in bulk then resold once in the states.

As an American who has been to the EU I can say with certainty that each one of those factors changes within an hour drive from my home. Making them a US v EU debate on an individual scale is meaningless. There’s nice parts and bad parts of both.

Legislation on packaging should really be entertained as well. For many products a biodegradable form of packaging would be completely viable.

People don’t like when you punch down. When a 13 year old illegally downloaded a Limp Bizkit album no one cared. When corporations worth billions funded by venture capital systematically harvest the work of small creators (often with appropriate license) to sell a product people tend to care.

Last I checked there was an instance rule preventing the posting of pictures of cheese without a trigger warning.

But nobody got convicted so the investigation doesn’t count!

The Due Process Clause will do that.

You did

The red symbolizes Steam.

Under the Administrative Procedures Act they get to create rules to interpret the law. Which enables non elected officials who work there to make changes to how laws are implemented to meet their understanding of best policy.

https://www.regulations.gov/search?agencyIds=IRS&filter=Deductions

The Federal government doesn’t have a sales tax on consumer purchases goods that they charge regular people (-a few very specific things). Most sales taxes are done by states, some states have none.

And the business isn’t dodging paying sales tax w/ deductions because again most things they spend money on aren’t being taxed on purchase. They’re having their amount of income the government can tax reduced as a reward for investing in themselves to promote economic growth.

Also private citizens have tax credits (which are preferable to deductions) too if they purchase certain things like EVs. If you buy a new EV the government will give you a few grand.

Talk to an accountant if you haven’t it sounds to me like you may be able to claim some deductions.

If for every $100 gross income you make you pay $20 in taxes and $80 in expenses you may be able to claim some of your expenses to reduce your tax burden.

Why does being profitable justify being even more profitable by paying fewer taxes?

It’s not about encouraging profitability (that only one proof of a real company) as much as allow businesses to grow, without people faking businesses to write off personal expenses. Properly reporting expenses can allow new or growing businesses to reinvest in themselves. I agree that there should be a different structure for large business but I’ll give a hypothetical to outline why it’s important for small businesses.

Let’s say a new family owned machineshop does $200k in sales in its second year. Pre-tax after all other expenses the business has netted $50k. Post tax (-$40k) they’ve got $10k left to reinvest. They want to buy $20k worth of machinery to grow the business. If they can deduct $20k for the machinery from the $40k in taxes the can buy it. If not they can’t.

Meanwhile the large international conglomerate machineshop down the road makes $400k a year post tax. If the want $20k in new machines they just buy them. This isn’t because they run a better business w/ better margins or product but because they have more volume.