They’ll be eating good.

They are no match for a series of conveniently placed mirrors on a sunny day

Your best chance of survival is either bear spray or playing dead. Shooting a grizzly bear in self defense doesn’t have great odds for the shooter. Things are hard to kill and much harder to kill before they can kill you.

Might get the shot off and it might die eventually, but unless it’s perfect that bear will be taking you with it.

If you’re an American it would be like going into the grizzly bear area while wearing a suit made of steaks

Maybe not in Mexico. In the United States? Killing cops is bad for business.

Local governments would much MUCH rather have voluntary compliance than face a litigated code violation.

These notice letters have contact information for code enforcement on them.

Now if the homeowner had called and was denied an extension then this would be the outrageous story the headline makes it out to be.

Yeah notice of violation is intended to sound scary enough to compel compliance.

Here’s the dirty little secret of local government: they’d MUCH rather just have people comply than litigate a contested violation.

For the most of you that won’t read the article: the title is shameless clickbait.

The notice gave 30 days for compliance. It’s a warning not an actual violation, infraction, wtv. It’s nothing more than code enforcement telling you something is wrong.

“If an extension is needed, we will give them that extension,” a representative from the code department explained. “We work with the owners or management.”

Homeowner said the driver’s insurance is paying for the repairs, which should be completed around the end of February.

So to summarize: the city gives a notice saying “hey you need to fix this” but they will work with you to ensure compliance is reasonably possible.

Yes the procedure of issuing it so soon was totally tone deaf and bad optics.

However a notice saying “you have 30 days to repair this” from an agency that explicitly states the 30 days is easily extendable upon request is NOT the same as an imposed fine.

It’s the possibility of a future fine if the homeowner doesn’t make any reasonable efforts. In this case the homeowner expects to be done by next week.

This story is a big ol nothingburger.

As a psychiatrist? Probably not too many.

I like using this because while you get to mock them for asking a stupid question you’re also helping them get the answer

When they started acting like them.

Let’s wait and see if CA DFW sends a cease and desist letter to animal control and a letter explaining to the child why her license is null and void.

relevant key and peele sketch