> too chicken

Apparently so is Route-55.

They’ll probably run afowl of some delays.

I hope they meat their deadline.

It snowed more in SoCal yesterday then in most of NJ all winter.

By encapsulating your code you are defining and separating the external interface from the internal implementation. By doing that the internal implementation can change without breaking everyone who used your components. Without it anyone who uses your components could come to rely on any method or variable you used. If a better implementation comes around and those methods or variables are removed then their code will break.

Similarly if your component is complex, say with lots of concurrency/threads, then leaving internal methods or variables externally accessible can cause all sorts of problems. External components could access those internal structures directly, potentially bypassing any protections you established.

There is always a diesel.

For those that won’t read the article > Starting on Dec. 26, Cherry Hill Police started enforcing the ban from the hours of 4 p.m. until 7 p.m. Teens must be with a parent or supervised by someone 21 years of age or older.

>This came about after an incident at the mall in 2017 that started at JC Penney. Police encountered 700 to 1,000 teens who converged on the mall. Several fights broke out, and five people were arrested.

Also, this is the fifth year for this policy.

No clue. I didn’t think what I said was controversial.

EZ-Pass express lanes are the ultimate twofer. Remove the tollbooth so you don’t pay the attendant while also having higher tolls seem less conspicuous. People just drive through and later wonder why they have to top off their balance more often.

> We all know that supreme courts can get new justices and overturn precedent if they feel like it, we literally just watched it happen.

The part you quoted said that the state Supreme Court and Legislature has affirmed the legal access to abortion. Making it a constitutional amendment would add another layer of protections but one that is largely unnecessary in the short term given the makeup of those two entities.

> They argue that the state Supreme Court has already affirmed the right to an abortion in cases over the past 40 years, and those protections were codified in a landmark state law enacted last January.

So they’re saying “don’t rush, get it right”. > abortion advocates say there is no need to rush through a complicated and monumental amendment in a final, end-of-the-year sprint in order to win legislative approval

That’s not a bad thing.

I haven’t been in years but it can be a lot of fun. Stroll around the grounds and then get some food and drinks at Rats

How about Grounds for Sculpture or the Lambertville/New Hope area.

> The AG said “disinformation.” So you aren’t actually in disagreement with the AG.

The AG, or at least its web post, used both dis- and mis-.

Ok. Good explanation. I’d maybe argue that in this context it is the AG (or everyone, really) using the term “misinformation” instead of “disinformation”. It’s also not easy to tell the difference between the two with a well engineered disinformation campaign by a well funded organization or government. Which brings it back to my original point: the government saying “look out for signs of organizational disinformation campaigns, here is how” is different from specifically calling for information to be purged.

Interesting point. Please explain. Seems the two are very similar and the difference is subjective.

The government defined Slander, Libel, Defamation and false advertising but the application of those terms to specific information requires a trial where both sides are represented. That is way different from the government saying “this information is false, remove it”.

It is one thing for the government to push the social media companies to better detect and remove the tactical influence campaigns by organizations (and other governments).

It is quite another for the government to define “misinformation” and coerce the social media companies to remove it. That is a dangerous and slippery slope.

Edit: when I say ‘define misinformation’ above I don’t mean them defining the term “misinformation” (though even that would be a challenge). I mean the government defining specific information as misinformation and demanding action based on that.

I defended my point, that the rules/prohibitions the OP cited weren’t on the NRA. Then the goalposts were moved to different circumstances. I’m not playing the what-if game.

Perhaps. Tho the fact that I never apologized for anything does. What the heck are you even talking about?

I’ve also given zero shits about the NRA and it’s headquarters. And?

You said “NRA bans” when it’s not the NRA.

As far as I know, private property owners can prohibit firearms on their property in every state. Sometimes it’s auto-felony, sometimes it’s “asked to leave and Tresspass if you don’t” but they have that right.

> Ever notice how guns are banned at NRA conventions, Trump rallies, etc.?

Ever notice that it’s not the NRA banning? It’s the management of the convention center, local/state laws, or required by the Secret Service when attended by politicians.

> There are education and insurance requirements for new applicants seeking a carry license.

The bill now requires the same insurance that Murphy explicitly prohibited in an EO and called “murder insurance”.

> In addition, there are 25 categories of public places where guns will still be restricted. Those include schools, bars, government buildings, college campuses and, yes, sports arenas

And 20 other “categories” including your own car, public transportation, and any private property that does not explicitly opt in. It basically bans carry in most of the state. That is specifically called out in Bruen as being unconstitutional.

> The way these politicians funnel money through committees and other companies is crazy.

Don’t forget foreign governments..

All while they go all in on cashless tolls.