Some of this is legit for new lawns. Established lawns can handle it. Only thing you have to worry about is blotting out the sun. Bare spots tend to get an accumulation of leaf mulch, and then new grass can't grow there in the fall or spring. Avoid this with scarification. I use tow behind tools, a core aerator and tine dethatcher.

I'd be like "thanks for the leaves dumbass, free nutrients for composting."

Mulch it with the mower, suck up with mower/bagger, dump in rows, cover rows clear plastic, water it, turn it in like May, maybe mix in a bag of lime if I have extra. Clear plastic, full sun. I try to compost every leaf. I'll be out there chasing down a leaf. Leaves blow in but they don't blow out. I use the compost to replenish garden beds and green up/fill in the lawn, or I leave it in place and grow pumpkins or strawberries in it.

Legend.

That's plausible.

What an absolute sick fuck.

Ehh. Our courts are pretty efficient at wading through the bullshit. Ten years ago I may have agreed.

I remember the first time I heard an OCPA litigant in a criminal court like twenty years ago. You have to realize, these litigants are victims of a mail order scam.

See pages 127 to 134 for judicially responding to such litigants. The whole thing is a great read if you want to know all there is to know about it.

Are you a corrections officer or know one that was sued or something, that you hold this view? I think you're grossly overstating the problem.

https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html

Individual litigants simply don't have the personal resources to waste significant judicial resources. The resources actually get wasted by corporate defendants who view the aggressive defense of legitimate claims as the built-in cost of doing business. These litigants actually have the competence and resources--practically unlimited funds and armies of white shoe lawyers--to use significant court time, as well as the opposing party's time.

Like, the number of inmate trials about mattress quality that make it to jury selection is zero. On the other hand the number of clear liability, clear damages claims for car accidents, slip and falls, professional negligence, consumer protection, workers' comp., and products liability, actually exists and is a significant drain on judicial and legal resources. They will spend two commas to save one, three to save two; it's to set an example to other would-be challengers: do not sue the corporate class, even if you win, you'll lose. Want to be mad, be mad at that.

Wow did the courts hire clairvoyants or something?

That adds some beef to the sandwich for sure.

>Francisquini has prior convictions for assault, drug charges, interfering with an officer, violation of a protective order, threatening and criminal mischief.

This could be from a single incident where dude, like, went to his ex's house (violation of PO) and had some weed in his pocket (drug charge), got loud (mischief), and when the cops came he brushed up against one of them (assault) and told a lie (interfering).

This is not as impressive of a criminal record as it sounds.

Still, if he was on parole and got rearrested he should have been locked back up. That's a judge's job and you bet your ass the chief judge is looking into this.

I bet they find this dude floating in the Quinipaic.

He must have been off parole when he got rearrested otherwise the parole would have been revoked.

If not, there's a judge that needs to be fired and probably some support staff too.

I can see why.

You're right I shouldn't use it.

I was there. It did.

In MA when the legislatures got the idea, pretty much every legislator in the majority party was pretty much on board right away. Obviously the war on drugs was a failure and obviously continuing to put people in criminal jeopardy for cannabis was unsustainable and racially discriminatory as applied.

In CT, it took many more years of pressure and campaigning from the left. Senior members of the majority party wanted to study the issue and even came out against it.

C'mon. Don't be obtuse.

I've personally explained anecdotal evidence to you like five times and I've seen other people do it many more.

Yet every day you still post the same sort of dummy arguments based on anecdotes.

That's a serious cognitive or social abnormality.

EMS is an awful field.

You get $17 an hour to drive people around who are paying what, $3,000 an hour to get in an ambulance?

Don't have to make a lot of trips to realize you're being massively ripped off.

Mass was first because it's a more liberal state.

Edit: ouch someone doesn't like facts.

Here's another genius that didn't read the bill. Angry about being illiterate.

CT doesn't have carbon cap and trade.

The estimate for CT was always early 2023. Anyone saying otherwise didn't read the bill.

Drop your phone as you took the pic or something?

It's obvious why I asked you.

Dumbest person on this sub.

Lol. Statistical facts though. Hmm.

Lol okay go pray to Jesus ya fuckin dunce.

>They’re called frangible rounds. That’s the .223 you use for self defense, and that’s what I’ll grab every time. Know the rules of weapon safety and the layout of your home.

Okay how about the rest of the post.....or do you only care about shooting your neighbors not family members.

>Have fun clearing your house with a 26” barrel and 5 rounds of buckshot (that can definitely go through drywall by the way).

You're larping around with some fantasy of home and self-defense, probably suffer from some lack of perceived control outside the home, when in reality you're probably just going to shoot one of those frangible rounds right into your spouse before you ever shoot an intruder.