Ram23

^ It's the second - there's an Asian/sushi place at the other end of the building.

Something that is an addition or customization is still a component and/or a "part of a firearm," by definition. The law doesn't say that a component must be an original/factory part. Lots of guns are scratch built and/or heavily customized, and thus might not even have original/factory parts. I think the intent of the law is pretty clear, and further it states that the City will be punished financially for a violation. I'm not sure what grounds are needed to sue - it's entirely possible that there isn't a single bump stock within the entire City of Cincinnati. Would someone need to actually be ticketed/arrested for this or could anyone sue? Hopefully it's the latter, and hopefully it doesn't waste too many taxpayer dollars.

Cincinnati City Council voted today to ban bump stocks within city limits. A device that, to my knowledge, has never been used during the commission of a crime in Cincinnati's 230 year history. This legislation opens the city up to a lawsuit as it's a pretty clear violation of state law, that restricts cities from legislating firearm components. A bump stock is, by definition, a component of whatever firearm it is a part of. City Council passes legislation banning bump stocks in Cincinnati http://local12.com/news/local/city-council-passes-legislation-banning-bump-stocks-in-cincinnati CINCINNATI (WKRC) - Cincinnati has become the first city in Ohio to pass an official ban on bump stocks. The Cincinnati City Council voted 7-2 to pass legislation banning the sale, possession and use of bump stocks Wednesday.

^^ I'm not sure who it is Tweeting that nonsense, but the actual cause for the recent gradual but persistent price rise is this: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-opec-meeting/opec-russia-agree-oil-cut-extension-to-end-of-2018-idUSKBN1DU0WW It's all the result of a tedious effort to get the price of oil right at the point where OPEC maximizes profit while making sure North American fracking isn't profitable.

If you really want an answer, just scroll back a few years through any of the pre-Trump political threads on this forum and you'll see exactly how it used to be done.

A few years ago, Ultimate operated some flights out of CVG, I assume because Lunken couldn't handle all the traffic. In 2016 they renovated their building at Lunken and moved all flights back. When they were at CVG, they comped parking in the garage and there was no TSA, so it was almost as quick and easy as using their Lunken facility. When at CVG, they operated out of the Admin building, which is gone now, though.

^ It looks like there were never any alleys, which seems to have resulted in the interior of the block never really being utilized for anything spectacular: https://i.imgur.com/H5cbz1Q.png It housed the beer garden, a carousel/swimming pool, circus storage, and a few stables and undertakers (in the same building - google tells me this was common!). By the last edition, the horses had been replaced by cars for the most part - the Kroger lot was a car dealership and the lots on Walnut were already parking: https://i.imgur.com/p0pykuM.png

^ It's interesting to see him push his gun control policies out as "gun safety." His website vaguely says he supports the 2nd Amendment, but most of the talking points he lists don't have anything to do with gun safety, which typically refers to the safe handling of firearms in order to prevent accidental discharge. I think his campaign decided "gun control" sounded too authoritarian for an Ohio audience, even though that's precisely what he's pushing (albeit a light version of it - for a Democrat).

^ State law doesn't allow individual municipalities to craft different gun laws. I believe this was passed in 2006. Columbus's law would have been voided when it took effect in 2007: http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/gp9.68 9.68 Right to bear arms - challenge to law. (A) The individual right to keep and bear arms, being a fundamental individual right that predates the United States Constitution and Ohio Constitution, and being a constitutionally protected right in every part of Ohio, the general assembly finds the need to provide uniform laws throughout the state regulating the ownership, possession, purchase, other acquisition, transport, storage, carrying, sale, or other transfer of firearms, their components, and their ammunition. Except as specifically provided by the United States Constitution, Ohio Constitution, state law, or federal law, a person, without further license, permission, restriction, delay, or process, may own, possess, purchase, sell, transfer, transport, store, or keep any firearm, part of a firearm, its components, and its ammunition.

It's in Cunningham's best interest (for entertainment value, if nothing else) to pit liberal urbanites who want a West End soccer stadium against liberal urbanites who want to defend against anything resembling "Gentrification." WLW doesn't have a dog in the fight, so the more brutal it is and the longer it lasts, the better. In this case, the homeless coalition type people fighting against the stadium don't have a leg to stand on, but WLW will give them a Soapbox because the in-fighting is entertaining.

^^ What a bizarre article. It's borderline incoherent - every other paragraph leads the reader off on a tangent that doesn't really seem newsworthy at all. It's like they had 2 or 3 articles that weren't important enough to publish, so they just took bits and pieces of them, copy-pasted them into one story, and published that. What's the point they're trying to make? Is it just a classic hit piece? It just seems to be a collection of a few marginally odd things about the guy.

Looking at metro areas and using 2016 election data as a barometer, I see no real correlation between blue/red metro areas and growth. Austin and Cleveland are the bluest metro areas on that list, and they are the bookends. Cincinnati and Nashville are the reddest. Source: https://www.citylab.com/equity/2016/12/mapping-how-americas-metro-areas-voted/508313/

It might have the most bizarre collection of houses in Cincinnati. I came across this once - from the front it looks like a normal 50s style ranch (which is in and of itself strange for Walnut Hills), but from the back? https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1241713,-84.4958244,3a,90y,106.39h,95.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skjUSlOqLVdqxPLEYV_TpGQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

It looks a lot like old working class British terraced housing. It's a strange look for something being marketed as "high end."

^ Yeah, the Business Courier's choice of headline is bizarre. That's a pretty standard Irish Pub menu, I certainly wouldn't consider it to be Tex-Mex, and the restaurant doesn't seem to be marketing it as such.

I always tip on my card. I know too many waiters who skimp on their civic duty by under-reporting cash tips to dodge taxes. At least if there's a paper trail, they're more likely to pay what they're supposed to.

Yeah, I use my credit card for nearly every purchase, and pay it off in full every month. I flew to Taiwan for free earlier this year almost entirely due to everyday spending racking up SkyMiles points. I don't use the credit card for anything I wouldn't otherwise buy. I don't see a downside - Amex is essentially paying me to use their card.

This note is legal tender for all debts... "For detbs," it is, but we're talking about payment in exchange for goods and services. Is it legal for a business in the United States to refuse cash as a form of payment? Section 31 U.S.C. 5103, entitled "Legal tender," states: "United States coins and currency [including Federal reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal reserve banks and national banks] are legal tender for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues." This statute means that all United States money as identified above is a valid and legal offer of payment for debts when tendered to a creditor. There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person, or an organization must accept currency or coins as payment for goods or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether to accept cash unless there is a state law which says otherwise. https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htm The Fed leaves it open to states and local jurisdictions to adopt commie policies if they so choose, but my guess is that only the types of places that ban straws and charge plastic bag fees will ever do so. The rest of America will give businesses the freedom to choose.

Different strokes for different folks. If you can't afford to maintain a basic checking account or credit card, eat somewhere else. A business has no obligation nor requirement to make their product accessible to people of all income ranges.

I grew up right down the street from this site - if you want to really be upset, take a look at what was torn down to build this: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.266351,-84.2590021,3a,75y,61.22h,101.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJSmIlYaJ5BS2hGhALIh0cw!2e0!7i3328!8i1664

The schematic plan says the field (labeled "pitch" for the same reasons people use words like "towne" and "centre") is to be 14'-0" below the "concourse" - I wonder if they're going for a Nippert Stadium feel, where the playing surface is below the surrounding terrain. It seems odd to put that on a plan, prominently, unless it's a key feature. If the field is planned to be at ground level, they'd probably label the concourse as 14'-0" above the field, instead of labeling the field as 14'-0" below the concourse.

The way that building meets the street is pretty unfortunate. I think that part of Loveland sits in a 100 year flood plain, so that might have been the reason for elevating the first living floor up that high above the street. There aren't really a whole lot of attractive ways to pull that off.

Yeah, Reds games average a similar attendance (20,000 to 22,000 or so the last few years) and traffic is rarely an issue. Access to GABP is easier than FC's new location will be, but UC's campus is harder to access and the infrastructure there manages to handle 40,000+ people for UC football games.

While Cincinnati continues to enable the drug and alcohol abuse taking place in this growing tent city, places like San Fransisco have started taking a better approach - Cincinnati could learn something from this: San Francisco mayor taking hard line approach to city's homeless http://www.ktvu.com/news/san-francisco-mayor-taking-hard-line-approach-to-citys-homeless There have been sweeps before but campers returned days later or simply moved a few blocks away. The mayor says this time will be different. This week, city crisis teams will be reaching out to homeless people in this neighborhood trying to get them into a shelter program. Those who refuse help -- will have their tents cleared out this week. The mayor told the San Francisco Chronicle that the city has gone from being compassionate toward homeless people to enabling them.

I've been re-watching "Police Women of Cincinnati" on Amazon Prime. I had completely forgotten about the show until I cracked a joke about it to my wife only to find out she had never even heard of it. It seems the show predated our relationship by just about 1 month - having originally aired in early 2011. It's pretty interesting to see the flashbacks to 2011 - some of usual open-air drug and prostitution markets are now yuppie central, and some are exactly the same. Some of the usual suspects are still up to no good.