Recent comments in /f/Maine
BackItUpWithLinks t1_j8dv0g8 wrote
Reply to comment by thesilversverker in Daytime running lights that illuminate the road, but don't activate the tail lights should be illegal. by Lacksum
My son’s older, inexpensive Honda civic had it.
It’s not just a feature on expensive cars.
thesilversverker t1_j8durh1 wrote
Reply to comment by BackItUpWithLinks in Daytime running lights that illuminate the road, but don't activate the tail lights should be illegal. by Lacksum
I think only one car in my family has auto as an option. Not everyone buys expensive cars.
Yourbubblestink t1_j8dt59a wrote
Reply to comment by 2SticksPureRage in Dogs in grocery stores. by Norgyort
I don’t want a snout in my crotch in the cereal aisle and I don’t find it cute that your dog is in the store.
If shopping is that hard, make a human friend and bring them along.
KingKoopaz t1_j8ds7hy wrote
Reply to Daytime running lights that illuminate the road, but don't activate the tail lights should be illegal. by Lacksum
Yup. I used to have a roommate who couldn’t understand why she kept getting tickets for driving at night with her daytime running lights on. My reply: “Well, is it DAYTIME?!”
DidDunMegasploded t1_j8dpqva wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in Dogs in grocery stores. by Norgyort
> You're a bold-faced liar! I said, "... if you don't even know whom you're addressing, no one can trust anything you say." If you weren't a total dunce, you would know I was referring to your confusing Yourbubblestink and me.
And again, I will ask: how was I supposed to know that? You act like we share a brain when we most certainly do not. Likewise, you also act like YBS and you both share a brain when I'm 95% sure you two are completely different people--he hasn't said a thing about being confused as to whom I'm addressing. You have. He has not. Why are you speaking on his behalf?
I know whom I'm addressing. I spent all of one millisecond looking at your username. And I know the usernames of a lot of regulars of this subreddit. YBS is one of them.
> It says I despise dogs. With the exception of working animals, dogs today are superfluous. In addition to being of no use whatsoever, they are the serial killers and mass murderers of the animal kingdom because they chase down and kill livestock and wildlife animals purely for sport. But their destructiveness doesn't stop there: dog waste destroys grass and everything else it touches, then washes into bodies of water and destroys marine life.
The serial killers and the mass murderers of the entire animal kingdom? Oh God...I feel ashamed to say this got me because I'm a big sucker for stupidity as a form of comedy, but that's just absurd. Nearly busted a lung with that one!
There are many animals that are far higher up in the food chain than dogs. Many who would kill and eat dogs if given the chance. Sure, the problems you mentioned are an issue, but there are animals in the world that are far more of a threat that people are more concerned about than an animal that is generally friendly and is often kept as a pet because that's how history and evolution works. You're making Mount Everest out of a molehill.
MontEcola t1_j8dpqrp wrote
Reply to Daytime running lights that illuminate the road, but don't activate the tail lights should be illegal. by Lacksum
I have been a driver in the US, Canada and Europe. Some countries require lights on while driving, no matter the weather. I believe Canada is one of those,but have not been there for years.
Lights on makes a difference to safety, especially in norther locations, and during cloudy, snowy weather. It is much safer when others can see you.
And cars with gray or silver paint are much harder to see. So if this is your car color, turn your lights on long before you need them. Just look at the pavement and background on those days.
And don't tell me 'I can see just fine'. You are not me, and it might be my car that rams into you, because, I might not see you. Or, it might be my grandparents, who both drive past age 90. My grandfather thinks he will still be driving after age 100. Turn your lights on.
SqueeBug t1_j8dovv9 wrote
Reply to comment by Norgyort in Dogs in grocery stores. by Norgyort
Still wrong.
Verity41 t1_j8dnvf2 wrote
Reply to comment by Beneficial-Basket-42 in Dogs in grocery stores. by Norgyort
For sure. Was tongue-in-cheek actually… I was just attempting to match the hyperbolic hysterical comment of someone who thinks having dogs in the kitchen is “living like a dog”, and that they are “filthy beasts”.
I actually love dogs though I can’t have one right now (gone from home too much). And I understand that of course people cannot leave kids in cars. They sure are walking germ-boxes tho, no one can deny that!
Chessie-System t1_j8dnn4i wrote
Reply to comment by SobeysBags in Daytime running lights that illuminate the road, but don't activate the tail lights should be illegal. by Lacksum
Driving down route 1, and here cometh an ANGEL OF THE LORD?!
Nope, just a European luxury sedan turning night into day.
wildwillows207 t1_j8dnkvc wrote
Reply to Daytime running lights that illuminate the road, but don't activate the tail lights should be illegal. by Lacksum
This! I got pulled over on 95 once driving my bosses Subaru Outback home from Boston. Had not driven it before and assumed that since the headlights came on automatically, that all the lights were on. I explained this to the trooper and he let me go, but I was totally pissed that anybody would design a car like that. So unsafe!
mainlydank t1_j8dmgqk wrote
Reply to Daytime running lights that illuminate the road, but don't activate the tail lights should be illegal. by Lacksum
I very very rarely notice this. Our biggest issues are people following too closely, and even worse speeding up when they are getting passed.
[deleted] t1_j8dm0z5 wrote
Reply to comment by Toibreaker in Ohio death cloud coming here? by TarantinoFan23
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_j8dm0v1 wrote
Reply to comment by DidDunMegasploded in Dogs in grocery stores. by Norgyort
[deleted]
Beneficial-Basket-42 t1_j8dlgcn wrote
Reply to comment by Verity41 in Dogs in grocery stores. by Norgyort
I feel the same way about kids and dogs in grocery stores as well, but the opposite as you it seems. It isn't safe or legal to just leave your kids at home or in the car when you go to a grocery store, so there they are. People will break the windows of your car if they see a dog left in it, so in they go. I think it is usually out of necessity when you see either inside.
I'm not currently a dog owner, but I can tell you, it is much easier to grocery shop without one in tow. The same goes for a child times 10.
Verity41 t1_j8dl540 wrote
Reply to comment by 2SticksPureRage in Dogs in grocery stores. by Norgyort
Ewwww. Like all shopping carts with those plastic panels and straps where the kids go… gross.
One of the reasons I completely LOVE winter - it’s normal to wear gloves all the time so you never have to touch that stuff bare handed.
DidDunMegasploded t1_j8dkwcy wrote
Reply to Daytime running lights that illuminate the road, but don't activate the tail lights should be illegal. by Lacksum
Either people drive with no lights, or they drive with blinding bright ones. No gray area whatsoever.
Toibreaker t1_j8dkpt9 wrote
Reply to comment by TarantinoFan23 in Ohio death cloud coming here? by TarantinoFan23
Actually it does, the equipment used to mine the minerals necessary to manufacture industrial sized panels burn on average 1800 gallons of diesel an hour, EACH. Then there are the plastics used in those same panels, made out of oil/petroleum, then there is the thousands of acres of woodlands that will be cut down to create a solar “farm” Add into all of that the electricity used to manufacture everything and that’s even more fossil fuels that are burnt. So yes solar power does burn fossil fuels and contributes to the exact pollution you’re talking about. When green or alternative energy sources are readily available and economical to replace fossil fuels or should we ever actually reach the point where cold fusion is possible than absolutely replace fossil fuels but right now fossil fuels are the cheapest and best method to power our electrical grid and daily lives.
2SticksPureRage t1_j8dkl58 wrote
Reply to comment by Yourbubblestink in Dogs in grocery stores. by Norgyort
Lol I feel sorry for your dogs. I definitely question if someone should be owning dogs when they just randomly hate some strangers dog that they’ve never met/don’t know.
KdawgEdog t1_j8dkfah wrote
Reply to Dogs in grocery stores. by Norgyort
I've brought my gfs dog in hanny before. It felt a little wrong(he is not a service dog) I held him. If someone told me I couldn't have him in there(you included) I would have gone back in the car probably.
Maybe you and employees should speak up next time if it really bothers you, I'd respect that.
What's my excuse for breaking the law? I guess lyme disease has me not giving much fucks about simple laws that really are not harmful. There is legal laws that can really get me going that I feel are bigger issues. I guess we all have our thing.
ChazmasterG t1_j8dj4ej wrote
Reply to Daytime running lights that illuminate the road, but don't activate the tail lights should be illegal. by Lacksum
I just drive with my normal headlights on all the time. I can see, I know people can see me. I fail to see any downsides to this plan.
DidDunMegasploded t1_j8dj3ss wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in Dogs in grocery stores. by Norgyort
> Conceited much? Do you really think anyone reads and remembers the crap you say to other people? I don't read half what you say to me!
Says the one who pulled a "don't you know who I am" on me just a couple comments ago? Like I'm expected to know who you are? Like it's law?
If you don't read half of what you say to me, then that confirms all my suspicions about you and tells me all I need to know about my question of "why is this person drawing out this argument they'll probably laugh about in a decade or so from now?"
Really, what is your endgame here? Are you trying to spoonfeed me r/dogfree philosophy in the hopes I'll become anti-dog or something? I'm genuinely curious.
> Are you for real? A lot of people panicked, including those employed by the CDC. And not only did the family who adopted the fleabag panic, they had to take the rabies shots and said they would never, ever adopt another dog. Everyone who cane into contact with the diseased mutt had to take the shots and when it happened, some rescue workers refused to interact with animals from other countries.
Where does it say they wouldn't adopt another dog in the Forbes article? Or in the two articles within that article? That sounds more like "If I were in this person's shoes..." to me.
In addition, where does it say rescue workers refused to interact with animals that came from other countries in any of those three articles?
> What's with the repetition and italics? Repealing breed-specific laws allows pit bulls and other dangerous dogs in communities where most people do not want them, and no-kill shelters is flooding the country with dangerous dogs. Numerous people have been attacked by newly-adopted fleabags, and some have been killed.
Well now I have confirmation that you're of the "every dog is disgusting and I wish them all a very get fucked and die" variety. So thank you. I wasn't quite sure. I had just a tiny sliver of hope that was mercilessly shot and left to die.
The use of "fleabag" says a lot on its own, as well--it's like "crotch goblin" but for dogs--but still.
Not every dog in a no-kill shelter is dangerous, and I can attest to that with personal experience. Similarly, the only "breed-specific" law that has ever been passed in the United States is for pitbulls. No other dog that, say, is ranked on a list of most aggressive breeds--just. Pitbulls. That's why people involved in dog owner culture give said laws such grief when they are enacted: because they view it as discriminatory. Ban one (supposedly) aggressive breed, you have to ban the rest of 'em, or ban any dog that bites a person even if it's just a nip of the finger, etcetera.
Definitelynotcal1gul t1_j8dj10d wrote
Reply to comment by joeboyhairlover in Questions about visiting, moving to, or living in Maine : Megathread by cafenegroporfa
Ogunquit
siebzy t1_j8di9n3 wrote
Reply to comment by anotherfourfootprune in Daytime running lights that illuminate the road, but don't activate the tail lights should be illegal. by Lacksum
Precisely.
SobeysBags t1_j8dhrwc wrote
Reply to Daytime running lights that illuminate the road, but don't activate the tail lights should be illegal. by Lacksum
What bothers me more are the regular (non high beam) headlights that are usually on pick-up trucks, that reenact the Eye of Sauron on the slopes of Mount Doom. My retinas are sufficiently fried. How are those legal?
markydsade t1_j8dvjpl wrote
Reply to Daytime running lights that illuminate the road, but don't activate the tail lights should be illegal. by Lacksum
In my VW I activated what’s called Scandinavian Daylight Running Lights. They turn the taillights on whenever the car is on along with the front running lights.