mr2mk1g

yeah... man I thought no one would smell me...

Campus access is covered by the No Child Left Behind legislation though isn’t it? - that equalized the military's access with other employers and again cuts funding if recruiters are prevented from talking to students on school property (which arguably projects their rights beyond civi firms). The PA legislation gives the military more information than any other potential employers (unless the school is in to selling their contact lists and then it only comes down to a financial benefit). Again though I'm only really surprised by where this legislation's to be found, not it's content.

That's just not funny.

Well there was a thread about the blue part a week or two ago... there's also numerous websites about it. I'm pretty sure that the Patriot Act was the enabling legislation for that requirement. Of course feel free to look it up yourself. I've phrased most of my posts as questions for a reason - that's what I'm doing. As for the black part - yes of course, that might not have been anything like the intent of the legislation, I perfectly accept that. And as I said it's not that element of it that I'm curious about. The only reason the black part is there at all is that it is that action that people are complaining about now the legislation's in place.

There was one time at a boogie (it was very very cold and there was ice on my tent) that I didn't change my underwear in the morning. I did this mainly because I simply couldn't face taking off the long-johns I was wearing as it was simply that cold.

I would be too - the stuff highlighted in those threads (admittedly my only source of info on the subject) is damned scary. Englishman's home is his castle and all that. Anyway, that's off topic - back to the thread everyone.

by "slower", do you mean the lens is slower to focus?

But what I'm saying is that I'm not expressing concern about the legislation itself... just curious as to why it was squirreled away in the Patriot Act. Over here that's the sort of thing draftsmen do when someone doesn't want the public (or the Houses of Parliament for that matter) to notice. Given that it's legislation that affects people's privacy and rights to a private life I would have thought there ought properly to have been a debate about it... instead it appeared to have been enacted in a way normally reserved for things Govts. don't want too many people to notice. I just found that curious that's all.

Don't know if this will be of any help, but the patent for the Vigil was posted a while back by Cpoxon. It might be of use to you as it gives an insight into the way its innards work. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=598602#598602

Isn't there also a clause snuck in there that if schools must provide their student's names and contact details to military recruiters so that they can call them at home to try and enlist them? Admittedly kinda linked to military capability etc but I wonder how many parents realized it was in there when the bill was going through... I wonder how many congressmen realized... Note that I'm not expressing an opinion on the worth of allowing military recruiters access to this data or in their tactics of contacting kids at home, just that I was somewhat surprised that the legislation enabling it was to be found inside an anti-terrorism bill.

I've recently come back from a training trip where my jump buddy and I did a shit load of VRW jumps together. We suddenly realized why all the teams have small grippers on their jumpsuits. 80 jumps later and we're converts where once we took the piss. Does anyone have any recommendations on suits with grippers as options? I've looked into Matter preconception suits, but I need a draggy suit and Matter suits always seem quite slick, along with their advertising which seems to suggest they don't like draggy suits as a concept. Anyone got any ideas or want to put any misconceptions right, shout now.

The canopy is in a column of air - it doesn't know what that column is doing relative to the ground. Relative to the canopy the column isn't doing anything at all. The canopy will simply chug through the column of air at 15mph (ish) irrespective of which way the column is moving relative to the ground.

Mine broke. e-mailed parasport italia about how to buy a replacement and a free one landed on my doorstep within the week.

Ron, you come up with some real odd arguments sometimes. I just can't reconcile my rather multifaceted views on the whole Iraq conflict with the rather trifling matter of gay marriage. If someone feels that put out by someone else’s private life then of course they should try to subjugate them and deny them of the rights they themselves enjoy by exercising their democratic rights to the full and voting against it where possible. If they can’t give a damn one way or the other as beowolf claims not to, then there’s no need to vote for or against anything. In circumstances like this where more often than not there isn’t actually a referendum on the subject it’s a question of campaigning against if you disagree with it or simply doing nothing. Beowolf bemoaned being asked to support a change to allow gay marriage. I wouldn’t ask his support – I’d only ask that if he doesn’t care one way or another whether or not gays marry he should simply do nothing. He doesn’t have to support it, just don’t stand up and try and stop it. As he doesn’t care, why would he want to? Anyway, I’m off carting for a laugh.

My opinion on Iraq is quite complicated and far from being capable of characterization as "something I don't like". Nor am I "standing up against it" in general terms.

Of course you are - but he said he didn't care. As you post above if you don't care then don't vote. Voting against would be standing in the way of something.

You're not being asked to support it - just not to stand in the way of it.

The UK realised it last year with the The Civil Partnership Act 2004.

Consider the wind tunnel as a first option too. There's one opening very shortly and one opening shortly, both just a motorway hop away for your friend. We guide people to tandems if they know they're not looking to enter the sport; to AFF if they just know they are going to enter the sport (even though some are wrong) and RAPS for the rest who are open to the idea of getting licenced but just want to do a jump first. In the UK there's a huge price difference between AFF level 1 and your first RAPS jumps... this makes a big difference for a lot of people. Only downside is you don't get FF... but on the other hand you'd have something like 7 or 8 jumps and done a couple of freefalls before you spent the same as you would have on just your first AFF jump alone. If he's not too worried about the cost though go for AFF.

Caesar was not a King - he was named Dictator Perpetuus and was an Emperor but refused to be called "King" or even receive a Diadem which was the Roman symbol of monarchy. Although I suppose you could argue he was effectively a King in everything but title.

I have great memories of my first jump. It was a static line jump. It goes something like this. aeroplane aeroplane aeroplane "In the door..." "Look up..." "three thousand, check canopy." Second jump went somewhat similar. By the third I think I was actually able to remember the exit. Don't sweat it - it's normal.

1) try not to pass out. 2) hell if I actually found myself in such bizarre and random circumstances that I could predict I was going to pass out - I might just tie my breaks round my chest strap (ie one break behind one in front and a simple bow tie in front). I'm now 3/4 breaks for my canopy. I'd then point myself into wind or to avoid hazards where applicable. Switching to my reserve makes no real difference for me, there's only a couple of square ft in it. I think its far from likely I’d ever find myself in such a situation though. (knock on wood).

Man that sucks for you. Lesson to us all to insure. What exactly broke where?

In the UK it's less common to require receipts etc - just tell them what you want to insure it for and they'll tell you the premium. I can insure my rig for a million pounds if I want to pay the premium on it, regardless of what it costs to replace.

Why does he have to have been to a game ranch to know he's opposed to killing for sport alone? That's a concept based opinion not an experienced based one. I may not agree with his opinion but I respect his right to have it and the fact that he's quite able to formulate it without having ever shot at an animal for sport.