rehmwa

It helps for both Point and IC (everybody really) to remember that the center of their body is near their junk - not located at their face. It really does. Motion on exit needs to initiate at center of mass - not the center of 4 of their 5 senses. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Clearly because they had a hard time finding guns. See? , it would be so much simpler to just have the San Fran government issue a "free" gun to every driver (except the rich, they can afford their own guns

tongue in cheek, Kelpy. Indicated by the total non sequitor, I'll try to use smileys for the slow people in the future stay off the caffeine, and have a fun weekend ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

This is why it's best to leave the decision to be made between a woman and her doctor. In private. the doctor doesn't get a vote - his job is to provide the chosen service IMO - it's best for the woman to have all the info available and then SHE makes the decision. (Hopefully, she's in a relationship where the father is part of the discussion). Side note (beaten to death so many ways) - Whatever the situation, if the decision is solely hers, then the responsibility for the decision (either way) is also solely hers. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

seriously, they should be allowed the road as long as they follow all the rules just like the cars. BUT, if there's a bike path available, then they should just use that and stop being assholes. read the fucking vehicle code already. bossly little shit aren't you? (hell, even funjumper takes a break on Fridays) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

seriously, they should be allowed the road as long as they follow all the rules just like the cars. BUT, if there's a bike path available, then they should just use that and stop being assholes. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

seems that dignity and respect involve giving someone all the information available and letting them make their own decision that means all the info from both sides of the issue all the medical info especially it also means to not sugar coat any of it also - honesty is the only thing you don't try to make it easy, you also don't try to make it unnecessarily cumbersome either. you just give the dry facts and let the adult make their own choice to me (IMO) the line has to be drawn at pushing a specific choice (either way), delays (waiting periods), or requiring personal interviews (psych evals without additional reason), etc - those are too much. In many states, men are required, even, to wait a month for a vasectomy - seems that's none of the doctor's, or the state's, business either. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

agreed on the the 1st and the 4th items (and I think the 4th is particularly a good idea anyway) - many here argue vigorously, that an abortion is only a procedure on some tissue, and is not used to avoid the responsibility of raising a person. So any references to actually giving birth, or child rearing would be off the talking points. the wording comes too close to using terms like 'birth' or 'child' So, you might find the pro-choice crowd would take exception to all but #1 and #4. They could be argued against by the biased from both sides - strangely enough. Truth and info, sadly, take a back seat to both sets of fanatics. (I like your approach, the criteria of right or wrong can frequently be established by using the same technique and substituting equivalent concepts from the other side - if it doesn't apply in both directions, then it's a clear example of unfair bias. e.g. - restrict (gun/speech) rights; it's not fair to (black/white) people; etc etc etc) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

There's nothing magic about it. I suspect your instructors will not have any issues teaching you on it. relax and just go jump with your coaches - it's silly to solicit this level of advice on an internet board ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

absolutely - and the solution is to give those women that information and nothing else so they can be fully informed. Provided that info is really true, and not just twisted to bias a decision one way (or the other). The intent of those pitching it is moot. It's in the application. And, this doesn't "Force" a woman into switching HER decision. It's about releasing info. My cynicism extends to both sides, it's also disgusting that there are those opposing giving women as much info as possible, just for political points, too. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

it's advertised as a mod for camera helmets, except for the Go-Pro generation, then the chin cup will make sense. Even for those that don't think they need it, they'll still understand. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

No, if we allow the use of reasonable psychiatric diagnoses, do you really think the anti-gun crowd will declare victory? or will they continue to push for the next thing - requiring EVERYONE to get a psych analysis. (stock slippery slope argument - I'm not up to really trying too hard today). But I like your list too - sort of an intermediate abuse to get to the next step. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I believe that. I suspect it's the entire point of the study too. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

http://www.allsubs.org/search-movie-quotes/Cutaway/ ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

well, that's a lot better (unless he's a farmer, they frequently fling poo in the direction of each other - it's called "cleaning the pen"). The key point is he is diagnosed. Not that he flung poo. As for the gun, I'd be ok if the doctor had the ability to report the condition to the checking agency - subject to being challenged, etc etc. How about this scenario: A 20 year doesn't fling poo, he lives a normal life, does nothing wrong. Should he have to go to a psychologist for a diagnosis just because he wants to purchase a piece of property (such as,,,,,as gun)? One other point (in terms of why gun owners toe the line so strongly) can you honestly guarantee (knowing that not everyone is as reasonable as you are most of the time) that allowing the first scenario won't be pushed until it's the second scenario? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

wanna go ride bikes? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I'm ok with restrictions for someone that's 'already' been diagnosed as homocidal due to an exam that was legally required based on commitable actions they've already demonstrated. I'm not ok with someone that's NOT been diagnosed for cause - I don't care how many manifestos or how much poo they fling. Nor, do I think the intent to purchase should automatically trigger the pre-requisite for a mental assessment if they've never committed an illegal/violent act in their past. (this is really the only solution any of these guys are proposing - or, at least, they are bumping right up into it pretty hard without actually stating such - perhaps Homeland Security, or the "Patriot" Act can be retasked) Rights shouldn't be casually taken based on what someone "might" do or just because you don't like their personal philosophies. Rights should only be taken as a result of actions that are demonstrated to cause harm to others. Sucks, but we don't own perfect crystal balls and I'm not ready to take any innocent and tie them down with a justification of "maybe" they'll be bad. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I can't wait for government to decide what is in that list of "abhorrent beliefs"....and then have it change every year. freedom of choice? individual responsibility? using a regular lightbulb? going to church each week? NOT going to church each week? not having ID? spanking? not spanking? etc etc etc and then using that litmus test to determine which of the rights I'm endowed with I get to exercise who here wants Al Franken to create that list? who here wants Michelle Bachmann to create that list? anyone? anyone? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

as of today - someone currently diagnosed as violent and criminally unstable will not get to buy a gun - I don't see how you plan to determine which people will get that diagnoses in the future vs those that won't. the "current process" allows people that have not yet demonstrated criminal instability to get guns you have not yet demonstrated criminal instability - nor have I - I am not inclined to restrict your freedoms in any way based on that. would you? how do you propose to take away a right to own property from someone that hasn't done anything wrong? though you sound reasonable on first glance, your comment is actually a bit distressing ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

sure, 'access to guns' made him crazy (I'm having a hard time keeping up, did the guns make him crazy, or was it his environment, or was it his life experiences, or was something just not wired right? so many options). and furthermore, as a very stupid individual, he'd have NEVER figured out a way to hurt a bunch of people in a confined building ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Yet, you can likely take another male, super hi IQ medical PhD from the same school and upbringing and he'll CHOOSE not to shoot up a movie theator... yet, I do agree with you comment, anyway. It's just that environment is not an 'excuse' for bad behavior and that mitigating our responses based on that does less than nothing to effect the change. We can 'understand' and 'sympathize' with the 'whys' someone breaks a law, but that is not license to lessen our corrective responses to their actions. Yet we see all the time, people that are willing to give one guy a free pass due to their upbringing and another guy not even if they do the exact same action. Inconsistency is a crappy way to mature a child - why on earth would it be a good way to mature a society? When someone flips out and commits a crime, I think the cause is lost the second someone cries out "but how would I FEEL if I was in his position?" Also, those that cry out that it's the 'environment' don't necessarily mean what you and I are talking about, they are saying it to justify social manipulation by the government. Which is usually just code word for transferring from one group to another and doesn't actually help anyone. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I'd be in that group. Just habit. Check exits, etc etc etc. But if I don't get the seat I want, it doesn't bother, just want to be aware. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Though true with those very close to us, I'd disagree with that in general. I suspect your point is in the first context. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Now I see the common ground. this issue here (and I like your post) is the libertarian believes we set those new expectations (i.e., societal norms) from the ground up - (it starts with the individuals and the families, not the government). Seems you agree with that. What you may or may not agree with is as follows: It won't be legislated, or at least that won't work. You can't legislate culture or thought control. Though it seems many feel they can. So you can belittle the concept of that libertarian, but if you get away from the partisan stereotype you're holding, you might find it's more in line with your thoughts than you think. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Sunday at the DZ, I personally took out 7 different attackers that were aiming scoped rifles at you under canopy. Just doing my duty. No thanks needed. (actually, DavJ is very reasonable on these boards, I'm sure he was just trying to make a point about capability of a possible random guy in a public place and that it's a potential positive in terms of self defense if the right isn't ripped from us - I tend to agree with him - maybe not everybody is capable of dealing with various situations, but that doesn't directly mean that NOBODY is. remember, this Dropzone.com. For example, if someone in an incident report doesn't chastise a stranger for not being 100% perfectly prepared for a random canopy emergency, then the thread's not complete. Please help us if in giving advice, someone forgets the 3 word of the 2nd paragraph of some part of the SIM in terms of training.) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants