> What happens if a person only ranks one candidate?

That's called bullet voting. We technically already do that. You rank your most preferred candidate and if they get eliminated, they get eliminated.

Ranked choice allows you to vote (as an example) for a 3rd party candidate with whom you agree more and still have a backup.

The issue with having to rank all candidates is when you end up with 20 candidates that are eligible. In NYC, for example, their last primaries were ranked choice and the Democratic party had over 10 candidates.

IMHO, the way Alaska does it, is a bit nicer. I'd prefer if all eligible candidates simply ended up on the ballot regardless of party affiliation and then parties can endorse whatever candidates they want.

The company that removed my tank actually dug down a bit in the front yard and cut the pipes off.

You were not served law suit papers and couldn't file a response?

Sounds like a default judgement, which could be set aside if you weren't properly served.

If GOP wants to stand a chance of surviving the progressive future, they need to go back to 50 years ago and choose Rockefeller instead of Nixon.

Nope. Murder is murder, regardless what tool is used to accomplish it.

There is an argument to be made that it might be difficult to prove intent when a car is involved, but then I'd posit that it might be difficult in any number of circumstances.

Still murder.

Can't get blood from a stone.

Murder requires mens rea towards the specific person. This is negligent homicide or manslaughter at best. (IANAL)

The issue is that straight up murder (actual intent) comes with a lengthy prison term and a poor employment prospects.

And on the more macabre side, this could lead to people killing children along with parents just to escape the child support.

Going off the top of my head: Out of ~40k motor vehicle deaths in US (in a year) about ~10k deaths involved a drunk driver (NHTSA data). CDC lists all of these as accidents. This is country wide data.

They are, but they are really government spy drones, because social media doesn't have all our info already. :D

News outlets reporting mostly crime is why people think that crime is always on an upswing even when it is on a downswing.

Hmm, guess that should say county, instead. :)

In old country if you wanted milk, you'd go to market at 5AM with your own 2 liter plastic bottles and find the farmer who came to town with a few barrels of milk (it was most likely not pasteurized).

What did you expect when you moved from a block with population of 10k to a town of that same population?

So, he admitted to past crimes and I assume the intent to commit this new crime is also codified. Sounds like the DA should have all the evidence they need for a properly prosecuted case.

Your argument makes sense. The "landlords who neglect the tenants" part threw me off what you were trying to get across.

> looking after the people they’re wards of.

Should that say "guardians of"?

Are you referring to minors and adults (who cannot take care of themselves)? I think that it would be a different relation ship from renter/landlord.

> The rent goes to the landlords who neglect the tenants and they end up walking around town and stealing from stores, etc.

This makes it sound as if landlords are caretakers of people renting from them ...

There is a VICE video on loli hentai in Japan. They interview a dude who draws it who thinks it's not wrong. They also interview a dude who was caught sexually molesting kids. The former said it wasn't wrong and was an outlet for the latter. The latter said that the comics caused him to act on his tendency.

Here's the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ky3HqvT3M8E

> In the three weeks the car has been sitting there

Now, has the car been sitting there for 3 weeks in total? Because 3 weeks (21 days) is less than 30 days as written in the ordinance to begin with.

There have been rulings that chalking tires is an illegal search/seizure under 4th amendment (watch but don't touch is fine without warrant).

I am not a lawyer, but it does sound like those chalking rulings could be used in such cases, since a government official touched the car cover without a warrant (what if it was not a car, but a car shaped box with something else in it?).

Shouldn't the employees who follow safety guidelines get that bonus? Or even their managers who make sure safety guidelines are followed?

NYCer in me says that it's a cop dodging tolls and traffic enforcement cameras.

Sounds like proper government is the better solution.