sycasey said:

---

Never have I felt more justified in my complete lack of interest in attending Burning Man.

---

concordtom said:

---

10% For The Big Guy said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

10% For The Big Guy said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

10% For The Big Guy said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

BearHunter said:

---

“Pizza-gate aged better than Russia-gate” -@michaelmalice

ABC News “Investigative journalist” pleads guilty to possession of child sex abuse material charges. pic.twitter.com/cHrMKtNTak

— Viva Frei (@thevivafrei) August 31, 2023

Pizzagate aged better than Russiagate.

ABC journalist investigating Pizzagate was charged with child sex abuse material charges.

---

NM. I changed my mind.

---

Probably for the best. Anyone dim enough to think BearHunter and I are the same person and post about it on Growls probably shouldn't try to come up with clever retorts.

---

No, I was just mindboggled that you thought anything aged worse than Pizzagate but decided I didn't want to get dragged into the muck with you.

You write like BearHunter, you obsess about the same topics as BearHunter, you came up with an alias that takes a shot at the Bidens like BearHunter does over and over again. Basically there's not a nanometer of difference between the two of you. It's pretty clear you're just another Yogi burner account, albeit one with more stamina than most.

---

If taking a shot at the Bidens makes me BearHunter, does that mean that you are all of the accounts who take shots at Trump?

Newsflash for Eastern Oregon Dim Bear - Biden is more unpopular than Trump was. It's a majority position in this country - just not in this Democrat safe space.

The Biden Democrats who got us to this point should be driven out of politics and never taken seriously ever again. pic.twitter.com/aI9hoG8ick

— Holding Biden Accountable (@PushBidenLeft) September 1, 2023

I think this documentary might be particularly relevant for you. Never go Full ******.

"Retarded: The History of Retarded" | TRAILER pic.twitter.com/7XTtOiGMfB

— Matt Orfalea (@0rf) September 1, 2023

---

Yogi, I see that your profile shows your account must have been banned again and that you recreated your account a few minutes before you posted this. That's going full r e t a r d.

Resurrecting banned accounts is something else you have in common with BearHunter and the other burner accounts.

---

BearHunter's account is almost a year old, dimwit. Hardly a burner account.

Stupid is as stupid does.

---

You're not fooling anyone.

---

Friend at Burning Man just sent me this. Crazy stuff… pic.twitter.com/wC1vqTDvQ5

— RE-OPEN THE SIZZLERS (@SaladBarFan) September 3, 2023

dajo9 said:

---

The giddiness of the right hoping for death and carnage at Burning Man is palpable. Why are they filled with so much hate?

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Joe Biden is completing Trumps wall....how come the press and the Biden admin aren't bragging about it?

---

California is passing Bill 553, which makes it illegal to confront or fight back against looters, burglars and shoplifters. You’ll be fined $18,000 if you intervene. It puts every employee at the mercy of criminals. pic.twitter.com/9f9VbEFfKr

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) September 5, 2023

Cal88 said:

---

^Right, cheap partisan grandstanding. As if you have to be a right winger to mock the carnival of narcissism and vanities that is Burning Man...

Meanwhile in California - this is unreal!

California is passing Bill 553, which makes it illegal to confront or fight back against looters, burglars and shoplifters. You’ll be fined $18,000 if you intervene. It puts every employee at the mercy of criminals. pic.twitter.com/9f9VbEFfKr

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) September 5, 2023

---

Cal88 said:

---

^Right, cheap partisan grandstanding. As if you have to be a right winger to mock the carnival of narcissism and vanities that is Burning Man...

Meanwhile in California - this is unreal!

California is passing Bill 553, which makes it illegal to confront or fight back against looters, burglars and shoplifters. You’ll be fined $18,000 if you intervene. It puts every employee at the mercy of criminals. pic.twitter.com/9f9VbEFfKr

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) September 5, 2023

---

oski003 said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

^Right, cheap partisan grandstanding. As if you have to be a right winger to mock the carnival of narcissism and vanities that is Burning Man...

Meanwhile in California - this is unreal!

California is passing Bill 553, which makes it illegal to confront or fight back against looters, burglars and shoplifters. You’ll be fined $18,000 if you intervene. It puts every employee at the mercy of criminals. pic.twitter.com/9f9VbEFfKr

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) September 5, 2023

---

Whoever drafted this law is is the most mentally sick, insane, criminally deranged individual I have ever been on planet earth with at the same time.

---

Quote:

---

In a statement provided by Cortese says, "Under my SB 553, employers would be prohibited from forcing their rank and file, non-security workers to confront active shoplifters, and all retail employees would be trained on how to react to active shoplifting. The legislation has other provisions that keep people safe at work. Let's take every reasonable step to prevent another workplace assault or shooting."

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

^Right, cheap partisan grandstanding. As if you have to be a right winger to mock the carnival of narcissism and vanities that is Burning Man...

Meanwhile in California - this is unreal!

California is passing Bill 553, which makes it illegal to confront or fight back against looters, burglars and shoplifters. You’ll be fined $18,000 if you intervene. It puts every employee at the mercy of criminals. pic.twitter.com/9f9VbEFfKr

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) September 5, 2023

---

Whoever drafted this law is is the most mentally sick, insane, criminally deranged individual I have ever been on planet earth with at the same time.

---

Or maybe the law doesn't actually say what Cheong claims it does.

https://kmph.com/news/local/enough-is-enough-ca-business-owners-and-lawmakers-held-rally-against-dangerous-policies-at-capitol

Quote:

---

In a statement provided by Cortese says, "Under my SB 553, employers would be prohibited from forcing their rank and file, non-security workers to confront active shoplifters, and all retail employees would be trained on how to react to active shoplifting. The legislation has other provisions that keep people safe at work. Let's take every reasonable step to prevent another workplace assault or shooting."

---

You still might disagree with the bill, and that's fine! But it doesn't actually fine employees who confront shoplifters. I'm honestly not sure where Cheong got that from, but I think there's a reason he just took a picture of the article and didn't actually link to it.

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

^Right, cheap partisan grandstanding. As if you have to be a right winger to mock the carnival of narcissism and vanities that is Burning Man...

Meanwhile in California - this is unreal!

California is passing Bill 553, which makes it illegal to confront or fight back against looters, burglars and shoplifters. You’ll be fined $18,000 if you intervene. It puts every employee at the mercy of criminals. pic.twitter.com/9f9VbEFfKr

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) September 5, 2023

---

Whoever drafted this law is is the most mentally sick, insane, criminally deranged individual I have ever been on planet earth with at the same time.

---

Or maybe the law doesn't actually say what Cheong claims it does.

https://kmph.com/news/local/enough-is-enough-ca-business-owners-and-lawmakers-held-rally-against-dangerous-policies-at-capitol

Quote:

---

In a statement provided by Cortese says, "Under my SB 553, employers would be prohibited from forcing their rank and file, non-security workers to confront active shoplifters, and all retail employees would be trained on how to react to active shoplifting. The legislation has other provisions that keep people safe at work. Let's take every reasonable step to prevent another workplace assault or shooting."

---

You still might disagree with the bill, and that's fine! But it doesn't actually fine employees who confront shoplifters. I'm honestly not sure where Cheong got that from, but I think there's a reason he just took a picture of the article and didn't actually link to it.

---

You're right, I think, but the bill apparently states this (according to the article): "It would establish new workplace standards, that would prohibit store employees from fighting back against thieves."
How will companies prohibit anything? Will they be made to give offending employees a stern talking to?

---

oski003 said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

^Right, cheap partisan grandstanding. As if you have to be a right winger to mock the carnival of narcissism and vanities that is Burning Man...

Meanwhile in California - this is unreal!

California is passing Bill 553, which makes it illegal to confront or fight back against looters, burglars and shoplifters. You’ll be fined $18,000 if you intervene. It puts every employee at the mercy of criminals. pic.twitter.com/9f9VbEFfKr

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) September 5, 2023

---

Whoever drafted this law is is the most mentally sick, insane, criminally deranged individual I have ever been on planet earth with at the same time.

---

Or maybe the law doesn't actually say what Cheong claims it does.

https://kmph.com/news/local/enough-is-enough-ca-business-owners-and-lawmakers-held-rally-against-dangerous-policies-at-capitol

Quote:

---

In a statement provided by Cortese says, "Under my SB 553, employers would be prohibited from forcing their rank and file, non-security workers to confront active shoplifters, and all retail employees would be trained on how to react to active shoplifting. The legislation has other provisions that keep people safe at work. Let's take every reasonable step to prevent another workplace assault or shooting."

---

You still might disagree with the bill, and that's fine! But it doesn't actually fine employees who confront shoplifters. I'm honestly not sure where Cheong got that from, but I think there's a reason he just took a picture of the article and didn't actually link to it.

---

You're right, I think, but the bill apparently states this (according to the article): "It would establish new workplace standards, that would prohibit store employees from fighting back against thieves."
How will companies prohibit anything? Will they be made to give offending employees a stern talking to?

---

When companies do not enforce this policy, they will open themselves up to lawsuit by injured employees, onlookers, and even the criminals themselves if someone is hurt while an employee makes any effort to defend a store from crime. Employers would therefore have a strict policy against this, which would possibly lead to termination for employees to don't follow their do nothing procedure when criminals are in the store. Unfortunately, it is never the criminals fault. See GFR's amazing tik tok links.

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

oski003 said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

^Right, cheap partisan grandstanding. As if you have to be a right winger to mock the carnival of narcissism and vanities that is Burning Man...

Meanwhile in California - this is unreal!

California is passing Bill 553, which makes it illegal to confront or fight back against looters, burglars and shoplifters. You’ll be fined $18,000 if you intervene. It puts every employee at the mercy of criminals. pic.twitter.com/9f9VbEFfKr

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) September 5, 2023

---

Whoever drafted this law is is the most mentally sick, insane, criminally deranged individual I have ever been on planet earth with at the same time.

---

Or maybe the law doesn't actually say what Cheong claims it does.

https://kmph.com/news/local/enough-is-enough-ca-business-owners-and-lawmakers-held-rally-against-dangerous-policies-at-capitol

Quote:

---

In a statement provided by Cortese says, "Under my SB 553, employers would be prohibited from forcing their rank and file, non-security workers to confront active shoplifters, and all retail employees would be trained on how to react to active shoplifting. The legislation has other provisions that keep people safe at work. Let's take every reasonable step to prevent another workplace assault or shooting."

---

You still might disagree with the bill, and that's fine! But it doesn't actually fine employees who confront shoplifters. I'm honestly not sure where Cheong got that from, but I think there's a reason he just took a picture of the article and didn't actually link to it.

---

You're right, I think, but the bill apparently states this (according to the article): "It would establish new workplace standards, that would prohibit store employees from fighting back against thieves."
How will companies prohibit anything? Will they be made to give offending employees a stern talking to?

---

When companies do not enforce this policy, they will open themselves up to lawsuit by injured employees, onlookers, and even the criminals themselves if someone is hurt while an employee makes any effort to defend a store from crime. Employers would therefore have a strict policy against this, which would possibly lead to termination for employees to don't follow their do nothing procedure when criminals are in the store. Unfortunately, it is never the criminals fault. See GFR's amazing tik tok links.

---

You are right again. Lulu just fired two employees for doing just this because of their policy. But they didn't need the government to pass a bill. I don't know the right answer but I'm pretty sure it doesn't involve the government passing more laws. They don't enforce many of the ones already on the books.

---

oski003 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

sycasey said:

---

oski003 said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

^Right, cheap partisan grandstanding. As if you have to be a right winger to mock the carnival of narcissism and vanities that is Burning Man...

Meanwhile in California - this is unreal!

California is passing Bill 553, which makes it illegal to confront or fight back against looters, burglars and shoplifters. You’ll be fined $18,000 if you intervene. It puts every employee at the mercy of criminals. pic.twitter.com/9f9VbEFfKr

— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) September 5, 2023

---

Whoever drafted this law is is the most mentally sick, insane, criminally deranged individual I have ever been on planet earth with at the same time.

---

Or maybe the law doesn't actually say what Cheong claims it does.

https://kmph.com/news/local/enough-is-enough-ca-business-owners-and-lawmakers-held-rally-against-dangerous-policies-at-capitol

Quote:

---

In a statement provided by Cortese says, "Under my SB 553, employers would be prohibited from forcing their rank and file, non-security workers to confront active shoplifters, and all retail employees would be trained on how to react to active shoplifting. The legislation has other provisions that keep people safe at work. Let's take every reasonable step to prevent another workplace assault or shooting."

---

You still might disagree with the bill, and that's fine! But it doesn't actually fine employees who confront shoplifters. I'm honestly not sure where Cheong got that from, but I think there's a reason he just took a picture of the article and didn't actually link to it.

---

You're right, I think, but the bill apparently states this (according to the article): "It would establish new workplace standards, that would prohibit store employees from fighting back against thieves."
How will companies prohibit anything? Will they be made to give offending employees a stern talking to?

---

From what I can tell, the intent of the bill is to prevent companies from REQUIRING employees to physically confront shoplifters (security guards excepted). I haven't read the text extensively, but seems like the company would be fined (or open to lawsuit) if it violated this law, not the employees themselves.

There could be indirect effects on employees' ability to keep their jobs, of course.

---

It is hard to tell. I cannot find the amendment that Senator Cortese proposed Monday.

---