piper17

Okay, now you have me fired up. The ONLY canopy that Pioneer produced that was a knock-off of a Para-Flite canopy was the original Viking. When I was hired in May 1978 to get Pioneer back into the sport market, I had them take the Viking and make a light-weight, low pack volume version - the Superlite. From then on, all other Pioneer canopies were designed in-house. The Merlin was, as far as I know, the only three-line group canopy ever made and was very successful for Pioneer. Done right, it was even possible to swoop with it. It was done to compete with the Unit but had a shorter chord and only A, B, and C line groups and no cascades...only the steering lines. The Osprey was also unique and produced to be a more forgiving canopy to the Merlin. It was about 220 square feet. The Pegasus had come along and we were looking to compete with that. Para-Flite also had a canopy (can't remember the name of it but Jerry Bird let me try his and it was a nice canopy) somewhat similar but I think we were all just chasing the same demographics. Their Stato-Flyer was pounding people in and the Merlin required just the right technique to get really good landings. We had a number of line trims on the Merlins trying to get the best openings and best landings right up until we stopped making them in favor of the Osprey. The Titan was a canopy for accuracy jumpers and somewhere around 260 square feet...no Para-Flite canopy resemblance there either. Pioneer also made the original "Hi-Lifter" for the Relative Workshop's tandem rigs. No Para-Flite version of that either. The TC-9 was a nine-cell for the Pioneer HAPPS system that we were selling to military units for HALO and HAHO applications. I took it all over Europe, SEA, and India. Para-Flight had a five or seven cell with span-wise construction whereas Pioneer used I-beam construction - completely different manufacturing methods. In conclusion, your statement is incorrect. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

You could always try calling your primary care physician. My doctor's office always has a doctor for emergencies on call. Also, there are plenty of walk-in medical clinics around here....I can get seen in a few minutes by an MD or P.A. Enjoy the Canadian winters and don't bother writing. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Looks like a Para-Flite MT-1 system. It might also be "hot". It wouldn't be the first time someone wanted to pick up some extra money selling stolen military parachute equipment. It would be a good idea if any one was contemplating buying this rig to learn a bit more about the seller and get serial numbers of the rig and canopies. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Why would you assume that the teacher is untrained in the use and employment of weapons? A teachers, like any citizen, would get the state-mandated training prior to being issued a state concealed carry permit. That training deals with when you can use deadly force and when you can't in addition to demonstrating proficiency with a handgun. A teacher, just like any citizen, can also go to various weapons training facilities (ie Gunsite) for additional training. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

I'm not sure the people of several Balkan countries would agree that such events are only found in the past. You can also take a look at some recent events in Africa, Southeast Asia etc. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Your low gun crime rate probably has more to do with the caliber of people in your country rather than stringent gun laws... "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Illinois, especially Chicago, has stringent anti-gun laws. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Brady Rankings: More Gun Laws, More Violent Crime Friday, February 01, 2008 In January, the Brady Campaign released its annual "State Report Cards," scoring the states according to their gun laws. Once again, the Brady rankings clearly demonstrate that states that have the most gun control tend to have the most violent crime. Brady says that a state could get a perfect "100" if it would: limit the frequency of gun purchases; prohibit private transfers of firearms; require gun show attendees to sign a ledger to be provided to the police; prohibit the sale of firearms that do not engrave a serial number on fired ammunition and require registration such firearms' purchasers; license and regulate firearm dealers at the state level; prohibit handguns that do not have "smart" gun features; prohibit detachable-magazine semi-automatics and some pump-action rifles and shotguns; allow the arbitrary rejection of Right-to-Carry permit applications; allow local jurisdictions to impose gun control laws more restrictive than the state legislature; and allow the criminal prosecution of people who use firearms in legitimate self-defense. Since most states do not have these kinds of laws -- gun control having been rolled back and rejected at the federal, state, and local levels in the last 15-20 years -- Brady gave most states "failing" scores. Forty-two states received 28 points or fewer, and only one state received a score higher than 63--California. But, as usual, Brady's scores correlate inversely with states' crime rates. Using crime data published by the FBI for 2006, the most recent year available: * California, the state that has the most gun control and received Brady's highest score (79), has violent crime and murder rates that are 14% and 23% higher, respectively, compared to the rest of the country. * Brady didn't bother giving a score to Washington, D.C., which has more gun control than California and even higher crime rates. * Most of the 38 states that Brady gave 20 or fewer points to, have total violent crime, murder, and robbery rates that are below the national rates. * For states that have total violent crime, murder, and robbery rates that are below the national rates, Brady gave average scores of 19, 19, and 14, respectively. * For the 10 states with the lowest total violent crime, murder, and robbery rates, Brady gave average scores of 12, 12, and 9, respectively. Copyright 2008, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Interesting. Now, how about some perspective. What is the rate amongst similar demographics (males & females 18-34) in the general population? This sounds like the NYT article about the high number of "murders" committed by returning US military personnel....until it was compared to comparable demographic data. Then, it seemed that returning military personnel committed murder at a significantly lower rate than the same demographics in the general population. AND, many of the so-called murders weren't even murders but self-defense and other circumstances. Figures lie and liars figure! "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Warped, yes, that was to whom I was responding...not you. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Lame? I imagine that it is...in your warped, socialist vision of how the country and the world should be. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Yes, I accepted a public education paid for by taxpayers...MY PARENTS! "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Funny but I have never found wealth to be obscene. I went to school to get an education, worked my entire adult life (starting at 16...not counting a paper route when I was 11) and have done reasonably well for myself. Bill Gates did not start out rich, nor did many other fabulously wealthy people. What they did was work, study, take risks, make good decisions, etc. This monetary envy in nothing new. We had the oil barons, the railroad barons, the automotive barons etc of the 19th and 20th century. We also had the same types of people envying their wealth and the same types of poorer people making lousy choices in life. Does government need to play a role in making sure that those getting rich do not engage in illegal activities to make their money, absolutely. It does not, however, need to create laws to take what they have accumulated in legal activities. I do not begrudge Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, and those of that ilk their wealth. Yes, I may be jealous of their monetary success but they earned it. Colin Powell was the son of Caribbean immigrants and did not come from wealth. He did, however, make good choices, went to school, worked hard (and took live-threatening risks in furtherance of his military career) and did pretty damn well for himself, including financially. You can come here from another country and start out poor but rise to the highest levels by doing the right things. Look at what welfare programs have done to the people they were supposed to help. Those programs devastated the family unit in the black community. Good intentions but terrible results. Government handouts are not going to solve the problems of bad choices and bad behavior by people. Taking from the rich and giving it to the poor may make an interesting novel but it doesn't work in the real world. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Address the issue. How did these "working poor" get into their current position and what are they doing to improve their lot? Do they (you) expect someone to hand them a lucrative job just because? As someone who is getting close to retirement age, I have had to change careers a number of times, return to school for an advanced degree, and worked two jobs until I could land a much better job. Industries that I previously worked in disappeared. I could have sat on my ass and whined and moaned but I did what I had to do to adapt. Because some people have chosen to make bad choices in their lives doesn't give them a right to expect taxpayers to pay for those bad choices. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

What is wrong with the gap between rich and poor becoming wider? Is it becoming wider because the rich are growing ever richer and the poor are growing richer at a slower rate? Why are the "poor" becoming poorer? Could it be because they drop out of school, become addicted to drugs/alcohol, engage in various risky behaviors rather than complete school, learn a skill/trade, go to work regularly? Or, if their jobs are eliminated, they fail to do anything to learn new ones? This country offers an abundance of opportunities to those willing to do what it takes to get ahead. Heck, why do you think we are being overrun with illegal aliens? It sure isn't because this country doesn't offer people an opportunity to make a decent living. If that was the case, they would stay home! "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Close....reduce taxes, reduce expenditures, reduce the stupid regulations that hinder business growth and watch the economy take off. Government isn't the solution to problems. Government is the problem. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

"Accepting public funds". Who is this great and generous public that is paying for public schools? Oh, you must mean the taxpayers of this country. So, it is somehow bad to send your kids to public schools that you have been forced to pay for? The federal government takes money by coercion from the taxpayers in the hinterlands, launders it in Washington (with our elected officials taking a huge cut for worthless pork barrel projects, make-work jobs, and lining their own pockets) and then are nice enough to send a little of it back to the communities from which they took it. And, for this, we are supposed to be grateful. I think not. Most of what Washington gets involved in is the responsibility of the individual states...read the Constitution and what it limits the federal government to doing. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Bush? Spare me, Amazon. It is being hailed by the MSM as bipartisan. Pelosi and her cronies wanted to add increases in food stamps, longer unemployment benefits period, etc. Frankly, I think they should skip the stimulus deal, reduce taxes to all those who pay them and let this sub-prime mortgage thing work itself out. Many people did stupid things - borrowers and lenders. They need to learn from their mistakes (suck it up and take the pain)...although it is always better to learn from the mistakes of others! "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

I don't "know" what you think. You seem to assume I think that you do....while I really think you just mostly spout the Democrat line without any real, original thought. If I am forced to pay for something, I will take take it. My parents paid their property taxes which funded the public schools while I was in school. I am old enough to pre-date most of the federal government's involvement in education which is supposed to be a matter for the states. The US Dept of Education is a relatively new creation. See below: ED was created in 1980 by combining offices from several federal agencies. ED's mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access. ED's 4,500 employees and $71.5 billion budget are dedicated to: • Establishing policies on federal financial aid for education, and distributing as well as monitoring those funds. • Collecting data on America's schools and disseminating research. • Focusing national attention on key educational issues. • Prohibiting discrimination and ensuring equal access to education. They seem to do a pretty piss-poor job of it. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

What is your point. Yes, I went to public school but to a private college. You seem to think because people go to public schools that this is something that is free. It was the tax dollars of my parents and other taxpayers that fund the cost of public schools - NOT the government. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

As far as "public education" is concerned, I think we as a society would be better off if everyone was allowed to keep their money and spend it on private schools and for the legitimately poor, vouchers. As far as taking "public education" - who do you think funds it. NOT the government which produces absolutely nothing (except problems for citizens). It is the private citizens who fund it and the government just screws it up with its incestuous relationship with the NEA, lucratrive contracts for administrators who don't set foot in the classroom and curricula that seem to teach everything but reading, writing and arithmetic. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Did you go to a public school or college? The federal (as well as state and local) governments do not pay for anything. They can't because they do not produce anything to earn money. Rather, they take money from taxpaying citizens and spend it on an almost infinite variety of things - some good, most not! "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Yes. See my other response below. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

DH Beaver or Otter "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

As far as "public education" is concerned, I think we as a society would be better off if everyone was allowed to keep their money and spend it on private schools and for the legitimately poor, vouchers. As far as taking "public education" - who do you think funds it. NOT the government which produces absolutely nothing (except problems for citizens). It is the private citizens who fund it and the government just screws it up with its incestuous relationship with the NEA, lucratrive contracts for administrators who don't set foot in the classroom and curricula that seem to teach everything but reading, writing and arithmetic. "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling

Does "promote the general welfare" mean that the federal government has the right to tax its citizens and then redistribute that money as it sees fit? If we take your concept further, then I guess the federal government should be paying to heat and cool our homes (or, for that matter, supply us with homes in which to live), provide clothing for us all to wear, and how about paying for everyone's vacation so we can relieve the stress of work (at least for those of us who do). Promote does NOT mean to provide. The dictionary defines promote as: "To urge the adoption of; advocate. To attempt to sell or popularize" ! "A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition"...Rudyard Kipling