The Tenacious Unicorn Ranch / @TenaciousRanch / Steampunk Penny / Penellope Logue / Phillip Matthew Logue - Don't cry because it ended, laugh because it's still getting worse.

Who are the top three strongest characters in the Kevin Gibes Inflated Universe (KGIU) canon?

  • Gash Coyote

    Votes: 102 4.5%
  • Rioley

    Votes: 277 12.3%
  • Penis

    Votes: 408 18.1%
  • Loathsome Dung Eater Jen

    Votes: 291 12.9%
  • Boner

    Votes: 295 13.1%
  • Kevin Gibes

    Votes: 671 29.7%
  • The Elusive Earl

    Votes: 701 31.0%
  • Landon Hiscock

    Votes: 262 11.6%
  • The Korps LARP Brigade

    Votes: 200 8.9%
  • Kiwifarms Militia

    Votes: 1,122 49.7%
  • Kindness

    Votes: 650 28.8%
  • Trans Cucumber The Child Abandoner

    Votes: 306 13.5%

  • Total voters
    2,259
OT:
The fact that regular law abiding non-mentally-ill firearms enthusiasts have to wait months and jump through hoops just to legally own a suppressor is infuriating when contrasted with this mentally ill tranny who is constantly surrounded by federally illegal drugs (I don’t agree with dudeweed being Schedule 1 but he should have to follow the same goddamn laws that the rest of us do)
The Texas penal code says suppressors manufactured in Texas that will remain within Texas forever are legal, fed regs be damned. The state legislature passed that one on the basis that suppressors were expected to be legalized based on some sort of disability claims at the federal level.
 
The Texas penal code says suppressors manufactured in Texas that will remain within Texas forever are legal, fed regs be damned. The state legislature passed that one on the basis that suppressors were expected to be legalized based on some sort of disability claims.
I’m somewhat aware of that ruling and while I possibly have access to the tooling to take advantage of it, I would honestly not bother just yet if only because it hasn’t really been tested yet, to my knowledge.

Like a TX state resident hasn’t gotten jammed up by fedboys over an in-state-manufactured suppressor yet; where in that situation I’m assuming the state government would intervene or not allow feds to press charges or something? I’m not much of a lawfag so I don’t even know how that situation would play out
 
Turns out Alpaca are like rodents and their teeth keep growing, so they either need to wear them down or have them cut periodically. They have no upper teeth, but have a rough pad in their mouths at the top, so when the teeth are at that point it restricts their ability to eat and prevents to teeth from wearing down. Considering this is a ranch, that's clear animal abuse.

That's what I was trying to figure out, thank you! I knew horses needed to have their teeth worn down, and all of the alpaca comparison images I saw weren't that long.

Too bad VICE won't mention what happened to Pepe the Vicuna.
 
The Texas penal code says suppressors manufactured in Texas that will remain within Texas forever are legal, fed regs be damned. The state legislature passed that one on the basis that suppressors were expected to be legalized based on some sort of disability claims at the federal level.
The problem is Wickard v. Filburn says otherwise, for numinous reasons, and Gonzales v. Raich more or less affirms it, a case involving marijuana that remained entirely within the state where it was produced. Clarence Thomas's dissent is correct, IMO, but I remain in the minority view on that.

Both those cases stand for the proposition that the federal government can use the Commerce Clause to control absolutely everything, even intrastate activity, so long as it can conceivably have an effect on interstate commerce.

Thomas said, about the marijuana law in question: "If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything–and the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers."

Here it is: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-1454.ZD1.html

The general gist of the argument is that if Art. I, §8, cl. 3 of the Constitution (the Commerce Clause) basically gives Congress the power to control everything, forever, no matter what it is, then why did the Framers even bother listing all the other clauses? The Commerce Clause already gives them dictatorial power according to current interpretation.

This is completely incompatible with basic unsterstanding that language actually means things.

Where the fuck is it said in the Constitution that Congress (or any other federal power) can regulate commerce that occurs entirely within a state?

The argument to support Wickard often comes with some law and economics bullshit like "market overhang," where even intrastate commerce in something like marijuana (or suppressors) somehow impacts the prices elsewhere, but this is obvious nonsense.

It's all just justification of a federal takeover of everything. Exactly what the Framers wanted to avoid.
 
[19:00] "When people realize you're not a cis-het woman that you're a trans woman, they somehow feel tricked."
Yes, because I never would've been able to tell this wasn't a woman without being explicitly told.
1696474598493.png
A good amount of this "documentary" or whatever you want to call it is just dedicated to gratuitous ass shots of the tranny strippers. And the "journalist" is slapping bills onto the strippers' ass cheeks. All trannies are hedonistic gooner porn-addicts like Gibes, on God.

VICE News are Alpacacaust deniers! Never forget the 200!
 
Last edited:
Kiwi Farms is far right as you all want trans people dead. Why do you think there's a trans genocide going on?
From sea to shining sea, you are reviled. Twenty years ago, perhaps, it was the right who knew you were poisonous garbage. Now? Everybody knows. Keep talkin, fellas, you
do the work for us.
 
Kiwi Farms is far right as you all want trans people dead. Why do you think there's a trans genocide going on?
Pink triangles have the worst takes on everything that does not align with their echo chamber. Must be a day ending in -y.

[19:00] "When people realize you're not a cis-het woman that you're a trans woman, they somehow feel tricked."
Yes, because I never would've been able to tell this wasn't a woman without being explicitly told.
View attachment 5386035
A good amount of this "documentary" or whatever you want to call it is just dedicated to gratuitous ass shots of the tranny strippers. And the "journalist" is slapping bills onto the strippers' ass cheeks. All trannies are hedonistic gooner porn-addicts like Gibes, on God.
Was this close to pulling an Austin Powers with “That’s a MAN, baby!” after looking at that photo. Either way, I’m not sure who pays attention to VICE “News” since they’re not even a real legitimate news organization. They’re about as defunct as Buzzfeed doing Trump Derangement Syndrome-based articles.
 
The argument to support Wickard often comes with some law and economics bullshit like "market overhang," where even intrastate commerce in something like marijuana (or suppressors) somehow impacts the prices elsewhere, but this is obvious nonsense.
And it was an activist ruling to preserve the crop growing controls. Several activist court rulings from around WWI and WWII have shaped the country for the worse.
Overturning it would strike a massive blow to federal power that I don't think the feds would allow.
 
Yes VICE, people want to watch a documentary on people that are objectively ugly as hell.
The video was incredibly hard to sit through, especially the strip club footage.
1696476189727.png

it's too bad we didn't get to see this pooner attempt the self-defense shit the other troons were doing. They were all so masculine with their punches, I'm sure this true and honest man would've been just as strong
 
Back