mr2mk1g

A better solution with more universal appeal would probably be a T-shirt displaying the message This could be applied by almost anyone in almost any situation. You could even turn-coat depending on who accosts you by simply saying it's in reference to X as opposed to Y. It would also sell equally well throughout the world, regardless of a person's accent.

Seems to indicate both on one canopy... maybe they are describing a tandem? Would be the most amazingly blown out of proportion report if that's correct though. To make it more accurate they should throw leo out in just a tandem harness and then swoop down to him before clipping him up and deploying. How long a delay would YOU leave?

The exit strategy is for the Embassy guards to cut down a couple of trees from the compound to allow a Jolly Green Giant to land. Hue's take off personnel from the roof while soldiers burn documents and hundreds of thousands of dollars in barrels. The local army has collapsed without US support and the roads are strewn with boots and uniforms as troops desert. Enemy vehicles are in the outskirts of the city and insurgents are already in the centre. At the gates of the embassy hundreds of locals who worked with the US during their time in the country clamber and shout to have the US will make good on its promises to them; desperately trying to escape the reprisals to come. A loan reporter is hauled over the gates – the last American left in country. In the Gulf, sailors push helicopters from the top of overloaded carriers so that the last sorties have space to land. Damnit... now wait... am I describing the right war here?

I got an email the other day from this company: http://www.technodz.com/ They've designed a new lanc controller for Sony camcorders... it does everything the cameye does plus it gives you the ability to zoom your camera to a pre-determined point. That alone could be a great feature for people who like to use a very wide lens but zoom through it to the same point for a lot of their jumps. For others it could be a nice feature for quickly catching landings or the like. Even if the product doesn't take off, it may well spur cameye on to introducing new features such as those added here. If it does - cool, variety is the spice of life.

I didn't think the jump-track was compatible with the neptune?

Him having the right and him being [I]right[/I] to exercise that [I]right are two very different questons. I'll happily give input as to whether or not a right exists (in this case I'm non-comittal)... however I try to stay out of the debate on whether suing is the "right" thing to do.

That same stitching has come undone on my risers too. I have the same HC system as you - it's 1 year old with about 130 jumps on it. I also noticed exactly the same thing happening on the risers of some club kit the other weekend too - that's from a different manufacturer and only 6 months old with only a couple of dozen jumps on it.

Sir Hiram Maxim who invented the machine gun proper (the Gatling gun is not a true machine gun as it is manually cranked) apparently invented the machine gun to end all wars. His view of the situation was somewhat similar to the M.A.D. concept of nuclear armament. He felt that the machine gun had such awesome firepower that nations would be unwilling to sustain the loss of life it would produce. Instead we got the First World War.

Ah yes, that's true here too. As a general rule no documentation = no training. I think that this situation may well be more akin to his being an expert in his field though. But as before, it really is impossible to make any more accurate considerations on the facts we have here.

I like the "guns" on number 5...

Possibly... but at 6000 jumps and holding the British equivalent of the US PRO rating it would be open to the court to conclude that he was adequately qualified irrespective of any training given to him by his employers. Remember, this jumper was also the chief instructor of the RAF Hawks... if someone needed training it would be his duty to provide it. Think of it as taking on a skilled craftsman who has had years of experience in the use of [insert power tool here]. Once that skill is demonstrated to the employer it may not be necessary for the employer to undertake any further training. But as I said – each case will turn on its own merits.

Everyone's missed the easy answer. Do neither! Then tell the powers that be why they're endangering people.

You don’t know it was only potential suffering. I don’t know it was definite. The only people who do know for sure are the doctors involved with that specific case. That’s the point – each of these are individual cases for which a blanket rule does not work; only a system that is flexible enough to empower physicians to do what is right in each instance. That child may well have been guaranteed a life of only a couple of weeks of agonizing pain. In which case my analogy is very apt and euthanasia should be a decision open to the parents and doctors. If the child could have lived much longer as in Nightingale’s links, then euthanasia will not have been the right call. Thing is, we weren’t there. We don’t have the info to second guess the doctor’s decision in that one particular case so we’re not able to sit here and condemn the actions taken.

Well, it’s always almost impossible to make a liability call with such limited information as there is available here. In this instance the RAF is acting as the jumper’s employer. During peacetime activities, the MOD owes the same duty of care as any ordinary civilian employer to its employees. Without going into employers duties in any detail it is enough to say that they are basically required to ensure their employees do not undertake any unreasonable risks. If this jumper relied on the call of the Demo Leader on whether or not they were to jump and the Demo Leader was also an MOD employee then the MOD could be vicariously liable for that decision. If the court found that it was a bad decision to let the team jump – liability might then follow. That is of course if the jumper can establish that the injury was as a direct result of that decision. For example, if the judge were to conclude that the accident happened because of poor canopy piloting or simply a bad choice of canopy then it would be the fault of the jumper and not the demo leader. From the rest of the thread these both seem like very real possibilities. It’s also heavily reliant on the fact that this jumper was not himself the Demo Leader. Given his experience he may well have been; in which case establishing liability could well be an extremely high hurdle for him to overcome. You should think of the jump discussed here as fundamentally different to ordinary parachute jumps. In most cases, no one is there to tell you to jump - you make that decision on your own. Even when it comes to demo jumps or tandem jumps most of the time each jumper is essentially an independent contractor and thus makes their own decision. Jump and you accept the liability for yourself. Here this is not the case; this guy was an employee – he had to do what his employer told him to do. His employer was under a duty not to tell its employees to do anything that was too dangerous. Normally you simply can’t find anyone in the course of an ordinary skydive who owes you that duty of care. The other very important distinction between this instance and ordinary skydiving is that the defence of volenti (that the injured party voluntarily accepted the risk of the injury) is not open to employers with regard to a breach of their statutory duties. This defence is normally a mainstay of skydiving litigation and can be a very powerful tool in defending claims such as this. Here though as a matter of public policy, the defence is not available to the employer. Therefore this case does not share that element with ordinary skydiving – normally that defence could be raised and might easily be the death blow to any litigation. These things always come down to the individual facts and we all know how papers rarely include many of those. Without such info, the above merely amounts to general theory on the subject. As such there is no way of really predicting what is going to happen in this case. Whatever happens, just remember that this case won’t actually mean a great deal to skydiving in general as there are a number of distinguishing factors.

Yes. Any digital camera you buy can be made to have a remote shutter release. Find one that fits your "cheep enough to loose" requirement that will also have good enough resolution etc then mod it. All you have to do is open up the body of the camera and access the wiring leading from the shutter release button. Splice a set of wires to a 2.5mm socket which you secure into a hole drilled in the body of the camera. The bite/blow/thumb switch plugs into that socket as normal and should fire the camera exactly as if it was intended by the factory. Don't blame me if you fuck the camera in the process though. I've seen one example done so professionally you'd think the camera came with feature... and one which almost completely screwed the camera. It all comes down to the ability of the person doing the mod.

You have had your answer - you're now fully aware of the intended meaning. Would you care to address the issue that's been raised or do you want to continue your rant about proper syntax?

Lycos just released a screensaver which uses a pc's down time to fight spam. Working in the same way that the SETI and Folding screensavers, this new free product attempts to create DOS attacks on spamers websites or otherwise massivly increase their bandwith expenditure. Read a full article here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4051553.stm Or download the program here. http://makelovenotspam.com/intl/index.html (it appears the site is down at the time of posting... perhas the demand is high or perhaps the spamers are already fighting back).

Heard of Socrates?

Probably the quickest and easiest way to do this would be to plug your camera into your pooter via the firewire and simply use a program like Adobi Premier to take frame grabs straight off the camera video footage. This is much quicker than fiddling round with camera menus and then transferring stuff manually. Everything's done on screen and the image you capture is instantly saved to your computer hard drive rather onto the card first.

Maybe he could have put it better... I understood exactly what he meant though... it's not my fault you were unable to.

Actually read what has been put in this thread. No one has is saying that the US has executed someone who was less than 18. What is being claimed is that the US executes people who were under 18 at the time they committed the crime. This has already been explained in this thread. The fact that they are no longer 18 at the time they were executed is testament only to the extreme length of time it takes for a case to work it's way though the legal system. Executing people for something they did as a child is not something that most of the countries in the world condones - to be precise, all but 7.

can't believe you havn't listed kebab...

http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/cell411.asp

Knowledge of infection with an STD and then unprotected sex is not on. It is worthy of a law suit and has resulted in criminal convictions in the UK - think of is as reckless endangerment, there's nothing different in principal. The other instance I have no difficulties with civil liability arising is a where a partner cheats on the other, thus exposing them to an STD. There is a duty of care to the partner to not expose them to an STD from outside the relationship, there is an obvious risk, a breach of that duty, that breach led to injury - liability should follow easliy.

Nothing to do with me. I'm simply a member of an international website (yes - this place isn't aimed at the US) who passed comment on a topic someone opened up for discussion. Precisely HALF my posts in this thread are JOKES. That should give you an idea as to the esteem I hold this conversation. The more he leans towards Christian fundamentalism, the more that becomes a possability... that is pretty much the extent of my interest in the topic. That and a wish to see my friends across the pond live a happy life. Beyond that it's all a joke baby.