and the whole hooters/twin peaks concept

I haven’t thought about Hooters in years. It always did seem like a dated concept from the 1980s that was somehow still clinging to life in the 90s. It’s still in business, so obviously somebody must be going to them, but I don’t know if I’d call it normal for most Americans.

Anecdotally this is also my experience. I grew up with shoes off in the house, but even up to the early 00’s it seemed to be a cultural outlier in the US.

These days I think the majority of people who I go over to visit have a shoes off rule. Seems like the split is between the older half of millennials and up shoes on, and younger half and down shoes off for the most part.

If a business has a sign posted stating “no guns allowed,” you can still legally carry your weapon in that business.

I’m sure that’s the practicality, but I am skeptical of the legality of a CCW permit trumping the rights of the property owner.

It sounds more like breaking the law and just not getting caught. Do you have any links to CCW permit overriding property owner rights?

#8: Police

State police enforce state level laws, and Federal agencies enforce federal laws.

The whole semi-autonomous thing. If a state and the Feds both have their own laws against something they could each try to arrest somebody, but there could also be a situation where one might not have a law while the other one does. For example , weed is still illegal under Federal law. The Federal government has mostly chosen not to enforce these laws, but it could. Many states have legalized weed to varying degrees.

So there could be a situation where somebody is smoking weed in a state that has legalized it. The state police have no power to arrest that person, but the Feds do.

I’m sure this has all made it more confusing.

In the US with all the variety there are places like that, but then places where you seemingly can’t find alcohol to buy and take home anywhere.

There’s differences between how wine & beer, and hard liquor are treated. I’d say the “average” experience is beer in any corner shop or gas station, beer and wine in a grocery store, and hard liquor in specific liquor stores.

Alcohol sales vary hugely between states. In some states, you can get hard liquor at Wal-Mart while in others you can only get it at state run stores.

The rules about licensing mean some areas gas stations usually don’t even sell beer, while in other places they have giant walk in beer freezers.

Some states or counties have dry laws where they don’t sell alcohol on Sundays, or maybe no hard alcohol, or maybe you have to wait until noon to be able to buy it.

It’s all over the place.

As for the Wal-Mart machineguns, I think you’ve gotten enough replies on that detail, but again gun sales are something with huge variety. Some states have put restrictions in place where a Wal-Mart theoretically could still sell guns but doesn’t because of the hassle, and gun stores end up being few and far between, while other places basically just have the Federal minimum in place.

And if he has a permit but is printing then it can also land him with some penalties.

I can’t find anything in a quick search the specifies printing as being illegal. In fact, a quick search brings up the opposite, that printing is not a legal definition and the discussion around it by laypersons often becomes muddled with confusion between printing and brandishing.

States will vary, but did you have a particular one in mind regarding the specifics of printing? Some of the search results I get mention some anti-printing laws but none I find get more specific than that.

It interests me.

Yes, finally. This is exactly the kind of case I’m looking for. Now I can dig into the details of the court documents.

That is just one of the things that seems very off to me about the claim.

my guess is that it happens sometimes

I just want to see one case.

Maybe someone on Lemmy has found one.

And so, my question.

I’ve seen the claim about Target online for years now, sometimes even with people in comments saying they know someone (or know someone who knows someone) that this happened to, but even after all this time no easily found court case. Nobody who ever says they have first hand knowledge ever comes back to say what case it is. It seems like this would be a slamdunk piece of content for one of the various YouTube channels that covers legal drama, but I haven’t seen it. None of the news articles covering Target’s Judge Dredd tier stoploss ever have an update linking to a case. I just want to see it.

As infamous as Target’s stoploss is, I figured people more plugged in would already know where to look.

Thanks, but not relevant to my question.

California still has a 10 round magazine capacity limit for ordinary private ownership, I believe. (Last I heard the ruling striking it down was stayed).

So, did this cop negligently just leave a super illegal thing (by California legal standards) on the floor for some medical technician to eventually pick up and get legally slapped for?

I understand the turn of phrase. I don’t quite know what you mean in the application here.

I’m not sure if I entirely follow what you mean by “turning things on their head”. What are you getting at?

I’m not sure what you mean by this. The industrial revolutions were not just about burning coal.

Robber barons were in many ways also tied to coal.

Robber barons are just a more evocative way of framing the period compared to the dry Industrial Revolution term, similar to calling it the Gilded Age, but all the terms are roughly talking about the same time period.

Either of the first two Industrial Revolutions were not named because of the burning of coal in and of itself. Coal burning was part of the widespread and rapid transformation of society. Coal played a part in facilitating previously unthinkable changes in a short time.

The adoption of cars has been more iterative and gradual. In the U.S. there are certain periods important for them such as, depending on how much you think it had an effect, the General Motors streetcar conspiracy. There was also the post WW2 push by Eisenhower to building National highways. But those didn’t radically and quickly change life in the way industrial revolutions did. There was the post-war boom, which if you want to view it through a certain lens, was a kind of revolution for the U.S., in that people found themselves with much more buying power thanks to the U.S. having assumed superpower status.

Similarly nuclear power production has not caused widespread fundamental change in a short period. Nuclear weapons did become a major part of geopolitics, but nuclear power is as far as society is concerned just another way to make electricity.