Public transport (also known as public transportation, public transit, or mass transit) is transport of passengers by group travel systems available for use by the general public, typically managed on a schedule, operated on established routes, and that charge a posted fee for each trip.[1][2][3]Examples of public transport include city buses, trolleybuses, trams (or light rail) and passenger trains, rapid transit (metro/subway/underground, etc.) and ferries. Public transport between cities is dominated by airlines, coaches, and intercity rail. High-speed rail networks are being developed in many parts of the world. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_transport
A rifle bullet at any reasonable engagement range does not fall so far in 8-14" to make such a shot impossible.
Wrong, as usual. >Any public or privately owned vehicle that offers transportation to the public at large for a fee is subject to (different) federal and/or state regulations and is considered public transportation. < We have a gov. agency devoted to regulating civil aviation, both private and commercial. Commercial aviation includes public transportation which are airlines open for public use. Rather then just guess and be wrong, consult the agencies that help regulate public transportation, the DOT and the FAA . .
You could always provide links to your claims, and try to establish if your claims are relevant. You could.
Defining public transportation is like, a dictionary exercise. Are you that incapacitated ? . You’re a strange one. Just look at dave8383 last post. Thought you’d be overwhelmed by logic. Let’s type together, “public transportation, definition”
Dictionary definitions don't always fall in line with legal definitions. It's the latter that's important. Edit: For example: "assault weapon any of various automatic and semiautomatic military firearms utilizing an intermediate-power cartridge,designed for individual use.Compare assault rifle." https://www.dictionary.com/browse/assault-weapon?s= This doesn't match the legal definition of the 1994 AWB or any AWB proposed or passed at the federal or state level.
I see you’re getting off topic. Another sure sign you know you made another mistake.... Time to move on.
From your link: "There are, however, a number of other safety and homeland-security-related issues covered in 49 U.S.C. Chapter 449 and Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations in the 1540 series that could impede movement, such as a passenger's name appearing on a "no fly" or "selectee" list. Regardless of the constitutionality of laws passed post-9/11 with respect to freedom of movement being a privilege, all U.S. citizens have the right to travel or move within and between the 50 states without the requirement of submitting to a search of one's person or property prior to travel or movement.[28][29]" You do not have the right to fly on an airliner without being required to submit to a search of one's person or property, nor must due process be followed to have one's name placed on a "no fly" list. De facto, air travel does not fall under the protections of Freedom of Movement.
Russia is super anti-gun! So super anti-gun you can't even imagine how much! In Rusha, permits are issued for knives. That's the most ridiculous thing I've seen in my entire life. A knife permit. For knives. Soon I expect: Ballistics on knives. Also in Mada Rusha, weapons for self-defense cannot be acquired by civilians. In Rusha, the Government does whatever it feels like doing, the Police does whatever it feels like doing, Mafia and Oligarchs can fusk your dead relatives and you won't be able to do a thing. It's the worst place to live in the world after North Korea and Somalia. So how's someone so anti-gun is gonna actually boost the NRA? That's a claptrap statement.
Russia wanted Trump to win, and giving large donations to the NRA was a great way to do it, as they do not reveal the sources of their donations. they spent $53 million in election lobbying in 2016 alone
The question is why would Russia want to use the NRA? The answer is because it's a divisive organization.
And they were significantly outspent in terms of lobbying by other organizations. Therefore the size of the donations and funding do not determine anything.
No evidence of money laundering from the nation of Russia to the NRA has ever been uncovered. The most evidence that has been presented is that someone who is a citizen of the nation of Russia has an NRA membership. But such ultimately means nothing whatsoever.
Yet again accusations and speculation without evidence. If there were evidence of such it would have been presented by yourself by not to substantiate the claims being presented on the part of yourself.
Nah, his Lol is befitting his posts: Lunacy over Logic... at least that is what comes to mind when I see his repetition of it.
