fearout

u/fearout@kbin.social
48 posts · 506 comments

Recent posts

Recent comments

I guess that depends on your definition of a flamethrower. To me, a flamethrower is primarily a weapon. And what you are describing is a roofing torch. Googling it now, I can’t seem to find anyone calling them “roofing flamethrowers”. Flame gun — sometimes — but never actually a flamethrower.

So the legality is probably an issue with not being specific enough with the tool/weapon differentiation. I don’t think actual flamethrowers should be legal.

That’s a stupid reason for banning people, but weren’t those just propane torches? You can buy one at any hardware store and tape it to a nerf gun to make a similar toy. While they do “throw flames”, I wouldn’t really call those flamethrowers, which usually utilize liquid fuel and are actually weapons.

I had a CT scan after an accident, and no one told me what contrast is going to feel like, the nurse simply injected me without any explanation.

And omfg, that might’ve been one of the scariest 30 seconds of my life. It felt like I was injected with straight up lava. My whole body was burning from the inside, and I felt like I would just spontaneously combust any second. It very quickly subsided though and there was no negative reaction overall, just higher sensitivity than average. But holy shit, I would want to know about stuff like this beforehand.

You know scientists always trying to make things happen but never asking if they “Should”?

I’ve never seen someone use this as an argument, only as a joke. Can you provide some examples of the things that you think scientists tried to make happen without thinking whether they should or not?

Also, how is user-specific trust at play here? I never even look at usernames, instead I will upvote or ignore posts based on their content. I don’t think you can really ease Lemmy/kbin users into believing some divisive nonsense that easily.