My dad uses that terminology and it drives the rest of my family nuts.

Not so much just using the term "supper" even though I do think that's an odd term, but using "dinner" to mean the meal the rest of us call lunch.

It's made worse because sometimes dinner means dinner with Dad but sometimes it means lunch.

When I still lived at home we had a few incidents where this confusion ruined plans, so every time we're making meal plans, I will ask him now "midday meal or evening meal, dad?".

Seems like a little of both makes the most sense.

Long factory shifts and employers discouraging long breaks from productive work coinciding with a greater ability to cook and eat at home in the evening.

Eide's is one of those places that while I don't outright avoid it, I have to have that magic combination of free time, convenience, and desire to put up with them.

​

I'm not sure which guy is the owner, but I've stopped in several times after work, headed back to my car, and three different employees have given me grief over having my laptop bag with me.

​

Once, I was basically done, having found a record I wanted, so I just came up, bought it, and left. The second time, the guy was short about it, but not quite rude. I pushed back a bit saying that this was my work laptop, and that I was just coming in to check out the records, and he backed off. The third time, the guy was fairly rude and adamant that I couldn't have my laptop with me in the store. I pushed back, and he wouldn't budge. He told me I had to leave it with him, and I refused, saying it wasn't even mine, it belonged to my employer and contained sensitive information, so I wasn't about to leave it with him. Then he said to take it to my car and come back. I said that first of all, I wasn't leaving it unattended in a public garage, and also...if I get to my car I'm going home, not coming back. He kept ranting and I pointed out that if it was about stealing, I couldnt fit a record in my laptop bag anyway. No matter. And he was insistent that I still shop, and give him the laptop.

​

Eventually I just told him fine, I was leaving. As I walked out, he started with the whole, "Well you don't have to get mad and storm out..." BS, still telling me to come back and shop.

​

I think I've been in twice since then, have never encountered that guy again. The first time, I shopped without anyone giving me trouble. The second time, the guy said I had to leave the laptop with him, and instead I just left. That was months ago, and I really haven't felt their selection or prices were good enough to justify going through that hassle again.

>This is no different from someone blocking your driveway with a car. And like when someone parks a car illegally, you're not allowed to just take it or destroy it. You have to go through proper procedures to get it moved even if it is a major headache for you.

Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but what's the cutoff for this?

​

There is a practical difference between a scooter and a car being left in your driveway illegally: the scooter is easily destroyed/thrown away, while the car isn't. But your point that illegally abandoned property doesn't make it the landowner's property still stands.

​

More to the point: what if the item left behind is a bicycle? A skateboard? A pair of shoes? A single shoe? A single sock? What if any of these are partially worn/damaged? Does that change the calculus?

​

These are all transportation aids, in descending values. My point is that at some point, we cross the threshold between "that's still their property and you can't just get rid of it" and get into the realm where it seems reasonable to consider the item as lost/abandoned, or even litter.

​

Is there a codified dollar amount of value that sets this? Some legal phrase about 'reasonable expecation'?

​

Getting back to OP's case specifically, why can't they just throw them away, and if anyone says anything, just reply, "Someone littered them in my driveway, so I cleaned up their mess."?

If you're looking for someone to defend the GOP keep looking. I'm no friend of their platform.

I'm not offering solutions or presenting either party as superior to the other on this issue, just pointing out issues that I perceive from my position.

As far as why the GOP does nothing: why would they? They're perfectly politically content to let the Democrats do all the work, since all they have to do is keep opposing it for votes. The portion of their voter base that are one issue gun voters need only silence and inaction to secure their vote.

Politically, the moment the GOP suggests anything that even suggests a hint of gun control, there's a riot in their base. So literally doing nothing but opposing Democrats on guns both attracts and holds those votes...it's the perfect political situation for them in that not only is a minimum of effort required, but the maximum benefit is realized specifically by saying the least about it.

As far as why no mental health proposals, that's easy too: that costs money. Any sort of initiative on that front means increasing taxes or pulling that funding from elsewhere, and if there's anything the modern GOP is clear about, it's that healthcare isn't their deal. Hell they're still adamant they want to take healthcare options away, why would they want to add more?

Ultimately it's just lazy and effective politics. By refusing to even talk about it, they can maintain the status quo, which is a situation in which their voters support their silence on the matter and opposition to proposals to upset the status quo...and on the other side it makes a huge issue for their politicians because while the GOP base wants no new gun control, the Dem base is screaming at them to do something. By preventing anything from being done, the GOP is making their opponents' lives that much harder too.

It's not that the GOP likes the shootings, it's just that being anti-gun control is such an easy position to maintain politically while securing a big chunk of votes.

I can understand your frustration, but surely as someone who wants to be sensible, you can understand the difference between a criticism of your proposed solution and a criticism against attempting to address the issue overall.

It's a complicated issue, but I often feel both sides of it argue right past one another.

Ultimately, the way I see it is that there's no denying that we have a gun violence problem and something needs to be done. However, all proposed measures I've seen discussed fall short in one or more ways. Some deprive law abiding citizens of constitutional rights without due process. Some make criminals out of currently law abiding citizens who do nothing. Some only serve as a legal hurdle for those who care about legality. Some do nothing to address the problem, only the ramifications of being a perpetrator. Some do nothing to address the problem at all. Some only effectively make it more expensive to be a responsible gun owner, effectively serving as a barrier for lower income individuals.

I'm not saying "do nothing", I'm saying "don't do the knee jerk feel good stuff that makes things more difficult for responsible law abiding citizens while doing little or nothing to address the problem".

Instead, let's try to figure out the best ways to address the thousands of gun crimes without penalizing the millions of gun owners not committing those crimes.

Because as horrific as the gun violence is, the reality of our democracy is that gun owners are many in number, widespread, and a ton of them vote consistently, with gun control factoring highly into their voting decisions...and as long as it's an issue that's easy to reduce to "Dems wanna take your guns, Republicans want you to keep them", those people are going to have at least one very good reason to vote red, or at the very least not vote blue. Even if you get a liberal gun owner who aligns with the Democrat platform generally, you're asking them to vote against their own self interest in that regard in many cases.

If the Democratic party could drop the typical gun control proposals, and come up with an idea to address the problem, without running afoul of the issues I pointed out above, I think they would fare far better in races nationwide. Liberal gun owners aren't a myth. There's a ton of them out there. And the party actively rejects those votes and pushes them into the other column every two years because they push for measures that will solve nothing yet make things more difficult for these people. In fact, on a more local level, I think a lot of these dark red areas of PA could turn pink, and pink areas purple...if the Democrats would push candidates who were pro-union, pro environment, and abortion and gun neutral. While that stance might make them unpopular in more urban districts, it's a big help in rural districts.

Yeah, I've yet to hear of any easy, economical, sustainable, way to simultaneously revitalize an area, attract new business, improve quality and quantity of housing, and reduce crime while also not displacing any current residents, not tearing down any older buildings other than dilapidated ones, not increasing average rent, and not "flooding the area with traffic and outsiders".

That's just not how it works. You get both the good and the bad or you get neither.

I'm usually the other way: if it ain't gonna be the Steelers, the further from them, the better.

So anybody (other than NE or a Brady team) over a division rival.

And most NFC teams over most AFC teams.

NFC north in particular, I can easily root for.

Personally never been a big Eagles fan but lots of my girlfriend's circle of friends are from out east, and I have no trouble cheering on the eagles alongside them.

He probably just got there faster than expected and had to just kill time until the food got properly cold for delivery.

I mean...are those people wrong?

How is an organized "crime watch" any different than the same collection of individuals separately having an MO of "if I see sketchy shit I'll call the cops"?

Just seems to me like the sort of thing that everyone is fine without, but it is formed by people craving any sort of authority they can get their hands on...uniting with the people who want to be up in everyone's business.

Predator, General Grievous, and that one spirit from Spirited Away.

The best is when you find yourself using landmarks that haven't been there your entire life.

​

You just learned it because you heard your parents using it so much, and so any time you're talking to anyone their age, you just fucking use that landmark because that's what they're going to know.

Yeah, that particular weird-ism (called "dropping the infinitive") was one of those things for me that sounded completely normal until it was pointed out to me...and ever since, it's like nails on a chalkboard every time I hear it.

​

Another one like that for me was "slippy".

Worst Jyn Iggle I ever seen was over on Centre & Craig years ago.

​

It was so sketch they put a dog-leg in the checkout lines to keep thieves from running through. And one time I saw some dude sleeping on a lower shelf behind a bunch of cases of bottled water.

I don't think I ever once saw anyone wearing a Limas Sweed jersey, other than Limas Sweed.

​

...in fact I'm not 100% sure they didn't just give him an old leftover Neil O'Donnell jersey they had lying around.

South Park Mitsubishi

Diaper first.

Guys, Beyonce really hates it when this picture of her circulates online.

Casey Hampton for Senate when?!

Going above and beyond doing their part(s per million) for our local air quality.

I mean I get what you're trying to say here...but at the same time, it certainly makes sense to evaluate a place based on how well you like the things you order and eat from that place.

It's a more valid evaluation for sure than deciding what you think of it based on other people's preferences.

>and would call when something came in that they thought you might like.

Really?

​

While I'm sure they'd stop if you asked them to, that just seems like "ending up on some company's mailing list" of the pre-internet age.

OP doesn't owe you jack shit.

If you're this salty about their post just downvote it and move on with your sad life.