winsor

I know, changing an opinion is a major sign of weakness and should be avoided at all costs! Why is it that first world countries with strict gun laws have far less homocides with guns? Demographics.

And then there's Kent State. Those were National Guardsmen who had just come from a high-intensity standoff with miners on strike. They were untrained in crowd control, and led by blithering idiots.

Simple, make guns as illegal and unavailable as narcotics. BTW, any bets as to which legal psychotropic drugs were prescribed to the author of this horror? Prozac, Zoloft, Xanax...?

So long as the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are in the Democrat camp, claims of bigotry on the part of Republicans ring hollow.

Trump is his own comedy special The trouble with political jokes is that they tend to get elected.

Uh, the book from which Jesus is routinely quoted was copyrighted by the Catholic Church. The fact that the Church repeats what they claim Jesus said is hardly a great surprise. "That's what Jesus said, yeah, that's the ticket!"

I hate it when so-called experienced jumpers trot out that BS argument, about PD canopies 'actually being more like a size larger'. By the same reasoning you could say that Icarus/Aerodyne/etc. is 'more like a size smaller'. [rant] Next time anyone tells you something like that, just smile and nod politely and go to someone qualified, like a rigger (which I'm not). Yes, there are different ways of measuring canopies. but unless you're a particularly high-talented competition swooper, you should view a 189 as a 189 and a 176 as a 176. Differences in size become more pronounced as the canopies get smaller. For instance, the flight characteristics between a 97 and a 120 of the same type are much different than between a 240 and a 190 of that same type. Aside from that, there should be no problem with a 176 as a reserve vs a 189 main. Though it is not all about size; the main is designed to have fun with, the reserve to get you home safely. [/rant] Agreed across the board, but I jump a smaller main than reserve unless the main is huge as well. I have landed reserves including 26' conical and 177 sf 5 cell (Swift), and have concluded that sizing the reserve is a matter of what I want over me if I'm incapacitated. Having your collarbone broken on exit can make using toggles effectively impossible, so you may want to keep your brakes stowed and steer by shifting in the saddle. Being unconscious for any reason - medical, injury, etc. - makes steering a non-issue. Having had an elbow to the nose in freefall that made seeing through all the blood problematic, it turns out that there are rather a few things that can make seeing where you are going difficult or impossible. You don't want to be under a reserve where being able to see clearly is necessary to avoid getting hurt. Regardless of what you jump as a main, a reserve is a whole different ball game, and should be treated as such. It's hard to look stylish in a trauma center. BSBD, Winsor

You'd think so, but I'm not overly optimistic. It's like discussing remission in a hospice unit - rather a waste of breath. Nothing good can come of raising such depressing issues when the point is to get people to feel good enough about you to cast a vote. Candidates want to get elected, not tarred and feathered. Getting specific about where we stand economically is a formula for the latter, not the former.

It's been done. The 'Foto Funnies' caption would be along the lines of "See Achmed? I told you fairies couldn't fly..."

Back in the bad old days, 'China White' heroin was available in Vietnam for pocket change, and was common throughout the military. A doctor who was in Germany in that era said that death from intoxicants was relatively common, but the culprit was always alcohol, never narcotics. A typical case was one where someone took a bet that he could chug the rest of a bottle of Johnnie Walker; he won the bet, collected the $10, and was dead before he hit the floor. Reportedly embalming was unnecessary, since the guy was pickled already. I reiterate my contention that anything that is not worse than alcohol and/or tobacco should be legal - which is pretty much everything. Mind you, I do not necessarily approve of any of it, but consider prohibition a case of the cure being worse than the disease. It sucks that the tuition for this kid's lesson involved being D.O.A., and hope the people responsible pay dearly. BSBD, Winsor

During the '80s I was repeatedly interrupted by various roadblocks to allow George H. W. Bush's motorcade to pass - when he was Vice President. Trying to cross Manhattan, on the approach to I-295 in New Jersey, same thing with I-95 in Pennsylvania, and one other time IIRC. It seemed that every time he was near, I wound up getting stuck for half an hour waiting for a series of black SUVs to come zooming past. So far, I have not had the incumbent interfere with my travel plans.

Not quite. Do your own homework and get back to me. A set of clips of our Fearless Leader addressing muslim audiences is easily accessible to anyone doing the most casual search. I do not presume to think for you. If you choose to think, good for you.

Yeah. Whatever. I'd press the issue, but you'll just make something up, so why bother? For all you know, you have a valid point.

Whenever speaking to a Muslim audience. I'm not saying he believes anything in particular. He does, however lay claim to whatever ism is convenient at the time. If this is news to you, it behooves you to do your homework.

A) Trump is an idiot. B) Obama DOES claim to be muslim when it suits his purpose.

Including the former SoS who is now running for the Democrat nomination. How DARE you say that she sucks?! If she did, Bill would follow her around like a lovesick puppy. As it is, he goes elsewhere for that activity (his current interest has a Secret Service name of "Energizer"). BSBD, Winsor

There's a difference?

It turns out that a number of presidential candidates have not been 'natural born US citizens.' George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson were ALL natural born British subjects - and traitorous subjects at that! The fact that we would allow fundamentally disloyal people who were not born as US citizens to aspire to the highest office in this fair land is a disgrace! Somebody should do something.

If religion is taught as part of Health class, I'm cool with it. Washing your hands helps keep E Coli out of the food chain. Sex is fun, but Gonorrhea, Syphilis, HIV and babies are known to result if you're not careful. Playing make-believe is entertaining, but the human mind is susceptible to all kinds of malware that prey upon this pastime. It is easily demonstrated that any conglomeration of nonsense that meets a few key programming standards can garner a following of True Believers (tm). Witness Mormon and Scientology. A study of the origins of various popular systems of belief reveal the social underpinnings they have in common. It is more useful to use religions that are out of favor as examples, since it is a given that a significant part of the class, to include the teacher, is likely to adhere to some system of belief. True skeptics are rare indeed. I think Islam should be discussed in class precisely as National Socialism should be reviewed. One may ignore something that evil at their own peril. BSBD, Winsor

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything." Abraham Lincoln So does this mean we should ban the historic 35 star US flags as racist? Nope. I say we should do nothing as a knee-jerk reaction to cries of "racism!" Having looked long and hard at the subject, those who rail on the subject have engendered antipathy, rather than sympathy, on my part. I find 'diversity,' 'affirmative action,' and 'political correctness' every bit as offensive as proponents of these enlightened stances might find the things they so staunchly oppose. In practice, I have found reprobate bikers with swastika tattoos to be more open minded than 'progressives.' I am generally indifferent to race per se. However, I have little use for anyone whose sole claim to fame is being a White Christian or an Indignant Negro or whatever. If David Duke and Al Sharpton simultaneously choked on chicken bones, the world would be a better place. BSBD, Winsor

It's all ok they are just cum-passionate conservatives having normal sex...none of that gay stuff "I say, haven't seen Churmondley* at the club." "You hadn't heard? He was booted for having sex with a sheep!" "You don't say! Ram or a ewe?" "Ewe of course - nothing queer about old Churmondley!" * pronounced 'chumley'

If you get good contact with both electrodes, a taser will shock the living snot out of you. If you don't get said contact, not so much. There have been cases where the darts didn't sink into meat, and the perp was still on a roll.

When you're alone, sure. When there are two other cops there, I think a Taser would be more appropriate, assuming he was actually armed. Good point. Somehow I think it would be better to school police in one of the softer martial arts (i.e., Aikido rather than Tae Kwon Do) and/or let them use riot shields to go up against people without ballistic weapons. Some time back I saw some teevee bit where an annoyed person was walking along the street with a knife duct taped in his hand. He had not harmed anyone, but when the cops cornered him, they wound up shooting him. The wound did not look impressive, but from the angle of entry, I imagine he bled out before EMS got there. In any event, I thought the whole thing was avoidable. My main objection to the use of firearms for self defense is that they are all or nothing (not to include pistol whipping, etc.). With a billy club, a cop can get someone's attention by gently tapping, or they can put someone's lights out by using a bit more enthusiasm. Any way you cut it, this was hardly a righteous shoot. I kind of wish the cops there were constrained by English rules, or were skilled enough to disarm a machete-wielding psycho and have them wondering what happened when they came to in the back of the squad car. Overkill is the sign of an amateur. BSBD, Winsor

Anyone within about 7 yards is considered a "deadly threat" when armed with a knife. It's known as the Tueller Drill A fundamental principal with deadly force is that the only justification for its use is stopping an attack. In this case, the suspect had not initiated an attack, but was within the critical 21 feet. The dilemma is whether a to fire a shot that renders the perp incapable of running 21 feet, say in the leg, move so that over 21 feet is maintained, or to "shoot to stop." Shooting to wound is a guaranteed invite to a BIG lawsuit. Even though it would have saved the life of the perp in this case, it makes the cop/shooter the judge, jury and executioner by the principle that, given the opportunity to select you shot that carefully, you did not have to shoot in the first place. I'm not sure if I would trust a Taser against someone armed with a knife. If you don't get a good zap, a talented aggressor can stab the hell out of you before you can clear leather with the sidearm. If someone has threatened to commit suicide by cop, they may well have a 'nothing to lose' standpoint, and present a much more significant threat than someone who would like to survive. Apparently that was the case with this guy. I have one advantage over the police in a situation like this. I can ethically run like hell. BSBD, Winsor

You have a point, after a fashion. If it turns out that, across the board, the treatment of individuals engaging in specific proscribed behavior is identical, but the objection is ONLY to the treatment of one group, the objection rings hollow. Accepted behavior in different populations is not uniform. Mormons have different issues than do Baptists, Vietnamese are not interchangeable with Koreans, and so forth. In Buddy Hackett's standup routine, he starts off with "Two Jewish guys..." "What? It doesn't have to be Jewish guys, it could be anybody." "Anyhow, two Irish guys are walking into the Synagogue and..." Taking into account social norms, much of what appears to be the case at first blush turns out to be wide of the mark. Thus, when you have 10 people shot to death under similar circumstances, and only those of a particular population group are under consideration, you've lost your audience. BTW, Michael Brown was "unarmed" in the same sense as is a charging rhino. The officer should have been given a medal for managing to drop him. BSBD, Winsor