“Free tax stamp” … I’ve always said “Free porn isn’t necessarily free.”
Oh, I hadn’t heard…
But wait I’m confused. Isn’t EVERY gun a machine of sorts? I’m handicapped and an FA type weapon would be quite handy for SD and give me a possible competitive advantage in a bad situation, but if I put a skirt on I might possibly win a women’s competitive sport somewhere… Therein lies the rub.
It’s Rubik’s Cube that can’t be solved and they wonder why chaos is boiling.
I’m gonna tell you for 15 years that something is legal.
Then I’m going to tell you it’s not, and now you’re a felon.
Then I’ll claim Chevron Deference.
Even though it has absolutely no role in construing criminal statues.
Then I’ll issue a public safety advisory when federal courts rule against me and bruise my ego.
I like mint chocolate chip ice cream.
So do I on the
Blockquote
I copy and pasted your question/post exactly as you wrote it
BARD QUESTION:
Why are they calling this a “Public Safety Advisory” when it is really a threat of prosecution that has nothing to do with safety? There has to be some sort of catch associated with them being able to say something is a PSA. anyone?
View other drafts
Draft 1
The term “public safety advisory” is often used by law enforcement agencies to warn the public about potential threats to their safety. For example, a public safety advisory might be issued to warn the public about a serial killer on the loose or a dangerous new drug that is being sold on the streets.
In the case of the prosecution of the Capitol rioters, the Department of Justice is using the term “public safety advisory” to warn the public about the potential for further violence. The DOJ is concerned that the Capitol rioters may be inspired by the success of the January 6th attack and may try to carry out similar attacks in the future.
The DOJ is also concerned that the Capitol rioters may try to interfere with the prosecution of the January 6th cases. The DOJ has already seen evidence of attempts to intimidate witnesses and to influence the jury pool.
The DOJ’s use of the term “public safety advisory” is likely to be controversial. Some people will argue that the DOJ is using the term to stifle dissent and to intimidate people who disagree with the government. Others will argue that the DOJ is simply trying to protect the public from potential threats.
The catch associated with the DOJ’s use of the term “public safety advisory” is that it can be used to justify a wide range of measures, including surveillance, censorship, and prosecution. The DOJ has already used the term to justify the prosecution of people who have not committed any violent crimes.
The DOJ’s use of the term “public safety advisory” is a sign of the times. In the wake of the September 11th attacks, the government has become increasingly concerned about the threat of terrorism. The DOJ’s use of the term “public safety advisory” is a way of warning the public about the potential for violence and of justifying a wide range of measures to prevent that violence.
Draft 2
The term “public safety advisory” is often used by law enforcement agencies to warn the public about potential threats to safety. In the context of the recent prosecutions of people who have shared information about the war in Ukraine, it is likely that the term is being used to try to deter people from sharing information that could be seen as harmful to the Russian government.
However, there is no legal definition of the term “public safety advisory.” In fact, the term is not even defined in the Code of Federal Regulations. This means that there is no clear standard for what constitutes a public safety advisory and what does not.
As a result, it is possible that the law enforcement agencies that have issued these prosecutions are using the term “public safety advisory” in a way that is not entirely accurate. It is also possible that they are using the term to try to intimidate people into not sharing information that they believe is important to share.
Whatever the case may be, it is important to be aware of the fact that the term “public safety advisory” does not necessarily mean that there is an actual threat to safety. In some cases, it may simply be a way for law enforcement agencies to try to silence dissent.
Draft 3
The term “Public Safety Advisory” is often used to describe a message from a government agency or law enforcement organization that warns the public about a potential danger. In this case, the message is warning people about the possibility of prosecution for certain types of behavior.
The catch is that the message is not actually a threat of prosecution. Instead, it is a warning about the potential consequences of certain actions. The agency or law enforcement organization is not saying that they will definitely prosecute people who engage in these behaviors, but they are saying that they could.
The use of the term “Public Safety Advisory” is likely an attempt to make the message seem more authoritative and to deter people from engaging in the behaviors that are being warned about. However, it is important to remember that the message is not actually a threat of prosecution.
The term “public safety advisory” is often used by law enforcement agencies to warn the public about potential threats to their safety. For example, a public safety advisory might be issued to warn the public about a serial killer on the loose or a dangerous new drug that is being sold on the streets.
In the case of the prosecution of the Capitol rioters, the Department of Justice is using the term “public safety advisory” to warn the public about the potential for further violence. The DOJ is concerned that the Capitol rioters may be inspired by the success of the January 6th attack and may try to carry out similar attacks in the future.
The DOJ is also concerned that the Capitol rioters may try to interfere with the prosecution of the January 6th cases. The DOJ has already seen evidence of attempts to intimidate witnesses and to influence the jury pool.
The DOJ’s use of the term “public safety advisory” is likely to be controversial. Some people will argue that the DOJ is using the term to stifle dissent and to intimidate people who disagree with the government. Others will argue that the DOJ is simply trying to protect the public from potential threats.
The catch associated with the DOJ’s use of the term “public safety advisory” is that it can be used to justify a wide range of measures, including surveillance, censorship, and prosecution. The DOJ has already used the term to justify the prosecution of people who have not committed any violent crimes.
The DOJ’s use of the term “public safety advisory” is a sign of the times. In the wake of the September 11th attacks, the government has become increasingly concerned about the threat of terrorism. The DOJ’s use of the term “public safety advisory” is a way of warning the public about the potential for violence and of justifying a wide range of measures to prevent that violence.
The term “Public Safety Advisory” is often used to describe a message from a government agency or law enforcement organization that warns the public about a potential danger. In this case, the message is warning people about the possibility of prosecution for certain types of behavior.
The catch is that the message is not actually a threat of prosecution. Instead, it is a warning about the potential consequences of certain actions. The agency or law enforcement organization is not saying that they will definitely prosecute people who engage in these behaviors, but they are saying that they could.
The use of the term “Public Safety Advisory” is likely an attempt to make the message seem more authoritative and to deter people from engaging in the behaviors that are being warned about. However, it is important to remember that the message is not actually a threat of prosecution.
thumb_upthumb_downrefreshGoogle it
more_vert
When I was little I peeled the stickers off my Rubik’s cube to solve the puzzle
I posted the BARD question/answer because I have had questions about some posts I have read lately in many places.
I thinks folks are using this type of tech online far more than we know it.
Just my thoughts anyhow!
You need to calm down and maybe take a break from the internet 
And try not to take that personally 
But seriously…
I do agree that seems to be a stretch at best of a PSA vs warning!
But then again they write the rules so it must be OK.
No problem no offense taken ,
But This AI is going to be a real issue .
I am just attempting to point it out
AND its a new toy to play with so just like guns , when you get a new one you test and experiment.
As far as internet I make my living from it , lol and have for ever it seems now!
I think this may be worthy of a new topic, the IT guys I deal with @ work have no clue when it comes to common sense. They are sub-par performers AFIC. I’ll drop a comment in Clearly off Topic
I don’t understand those IT guys
I understand welding, machining, metallurgy, 4wd, and DI systems
I’ll leave the Chatgpt for the millennials
What does this hafta do with the ATF again?
Even a silicon wafer is smart enough to recognize BS when it sees it.
Sorry to respond to YOUR request to post the question posed.
and it has everything to do with the ATF if one reads it and the point being made. vs head in sand response, no offense intended…
i answered the posters request , sorry if you don’t approve
or get it…
