@[email protected] to Comic [email protected] • 3 months agoSMBC [2012-02-02]www.smbc-comics.commessage-square7fedilinkarrow-up1600file-text
arrow-up1600imageSMBC [2012-02-02]www.smbc-comics.com@[email protected] to Comic [email protected] • 3 months agomessage-square7fedilinkfile-text
minus-square@[email protected]OPlinkfedilink108•3 months agoA bit sad that this is still relevant 12 years later.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink37•3 months agoThose supposedly outrageous counter examples are much less unheard of though.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish12•3 months agoBecause those are beaches of the 4th amendment, so of course you don’t see that happen very often. That’s the point being made.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilink25•edit-23 months agoThe person you’re replying to is saying that those breaches of the 4th amendment are less absurd now than they were at the time the comic was written
minus-square@pantyhosewimplink11•3 months ago much less unheard of Don’t fail to not use double negatives! No wonder the responder didn’t unsuccessfully misunderstand the sentence.
A bit sad that this is still relevant 12 years later.
Those supposedly outrageous counter examples are much less unheard of though.
Because those are beaches of the 4th amendment, so of course you don’t see that happen very often. That’s the point being made.
The person you’re replying to is saying that those breaches of the 4th amendment are less absurd now than they were at the time the comic was written
Don’t fail to not use double negatives!
No wonder the responder didn’t unsuccessfully misunderstand the sentence.
Yesn’t