No, you can think of them more like unarmed artillery shells. Can you walk down the street to buy some artillery munitions?
Even if they were considered arms for the purpose of 2a this isn’t a ban on drones but a specific manufacturer. They government can definitely refuse to grant a manufacturer license to sell on this country.
After Mcviegh, shouldn’t all U-Haul’s be seen as unarmed vehicular large IEDs? A drone isn’t like an artillery shell because an artillery shell is for putting in an artillery gun. A drone is for flying. Just because something can be modified to serve as some sort of weapon, does make it basically a weapon.
It was quite common in the wake of McVeigh and other large vehicle attacks that they should be seen as weapons and licensing strengthened.
The fact you can drive a 26,000 lb GVWR truck without any special license is something special we have in America compared to most of say, Europe. It's actually pretty mind blowing anyone can just rent 26 ft diesel 26,000 lb truck and get in and drive it on the highway.
It is testament to the fact there are a few vestiges of freedom left in America. Not much, but a few vestiges, since such trucks were around before the regulation hysteria of the late 20th century and 21st century.
>> Can you walk down the street to buy some artillery munitions?
No I need to go to a flea market for that.
It's not a specific manufacturer; it will impact US-made drones too, and based on how it's being rolled out is intended to shut down decent quality, inexpensive and easily-acquired drown sales - exactly what say, a journalist might want.
Not really, not for the air warfare context of drones.
SAM can't be bought for any tax and they come with lifetime in jail if you have them, even just for peaceful purposes.[]
Giving up air military supremacy isn't something the USA is going to yield to its citizens. The tax is reflective of the fact that machineguns and destructive devices can't be banned as they are "arms" that can merely be taxed, but the US doesn't considered air warfare weapons generally to be bearable arms.
As drones become a dominating form of air superiority I would expect they start to become more like SAMs -- not bearable arms but rather arms that merely having in your arms mean you go in a cage forever even if you have an NFA stamp affixed.
If you read one book a quarter then yeah it’s not for you. If you read one book a week you can queue up fifty good books and wait for that one to come available at some point in the year.
A good currency is stable. Bitcoin has gone up over 5x in the last 5 years. This is not a good currency, though it’s certainly been a good speculative bet.
What is BTC inflation? How much BTC was printed by government in recent years? And of course - how much it grew in value?
In other words:
* deflationary nature
* independence of any government
* speculation
Governments will keep printing money. Stock market is only good in US (check Japan and China). Bitcoin is good alternative investment in places where options primarily limited to property.
You can equally ask what was inflation of natural gold and diamonds. It was zero since there is fixed amount of gold and diamonds on the planet. Same with bitcoin.
What?? There has been more Bitcoin today than there was yesterday since the first BTC was mined. It's the definition of inflationary. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Medical tourism is a huge industry. A 3 month supply costs more than $3k in the USA. A flight to Canada costs $300 and takes a few hours of your time. I’d definitely do it if I was taking the drug.
Generics are so cheap and easy to make that they can reasonably justify that it will save the government money by making the population healthier. Just think about how much less heart disease and cancer and every other obesity-affected disease costs the taxpayer.
totally agree. was pointing out things left out from the previous comment which was kinda of impling gov would be paying all uses of the sliming drugs, even if on generics price. ... because those drugs make profit not because of it's health benefits.
This article is saying that the patent elapsed in 2018 because thy didn’t pay the $250 to renew the patent. Instead they relied on “data exclusivity” which means their trial data is exclusively theirs and anyone who wants to sell in Canada must first run safety trials of their own at a huge expense. It’s just as good as a patent but has a shorter window of exclusivity.
> Instead they relied on “data exclusivity” which means their trial data is exclusively theirs and anyone who wants to sell in Canada must first run safety trials of their own at a huge expense.
Any update can brick your device if done poorly. This device just happens to be a car.
You misunderstood what OP was saying. They claimed that an update to the infotainment system shouldn’t be able to brick the other systems in the car. The response points out the car’s OTA update subroutine has access to update every critical system in the car by design. It’s flawed logic to assume that OTA updates only affect the infotainment system.
I had it done in late 2022. The doctor does close to zero work and it’s all in the laser. I called almost every lasik specialist in the city to figure out what laser they use and what their price is and then narrowed that list further with in person consultations. Don’t go for the absolute cheapest but there’s zero reason to pay quadruple.
At the time it was about $1k per eye and of course vision insurance sucks and won’t make a difference for lasik. My company even had a lasik benefit ($1k/eye) but the offices that worked through insurance cost $2.5k/eye.
If I recall correctly there’s three major laser brands and they’re on the fifth generation lasers. The buzzword at that time was waveform technology.
Overall it has been AMAZING and everyone should do it. Literally can’t express how wonderful it is to no longer need contracts or glasses. It’s probably paid for itself already as well but the quality of life improvements are worth it even if there was no break even point.
Even if they were considered arms for the purpose of 2a this isn’t a ban on drones but a specific manufacturer. They government can definitely refuse to grant a manufacturer license to sell on this country.