champu

Better hope there is no traces of crack on any of the cash in your wallet. If your wallet weighs 100 grams that's a first degree felony and you face the same charges as in the OP. (if you have cash in your 100 g wallet then it more than likely has some amount of cocaine in it... but don't worry that's only a 3rd degree felony... unless they weigh your pants too...)

Well, as the article says... Most of it was interesting but a few parts were dismissive. I think the biggest flaw he makes is conflating mistrust with active denial of underlying information. In cases of the latter I agree with him, but I think it's sketchy to reference poll questions that ask about whether you have strong confidence in the media's ability to accurately report scientific findings (I don't have strong confidence in the media's ability to accurately report what they ate for breakfast that morning) as part of an erosion of trust in science. Also, like the Democratic platform in general, the author/editor could have done away with the photo of the old couple with the AR pistols at the top of the article, and the paragraph that references three anecdotes, bemoans the lack of "common sense" measures, and tells three more anecdotes of things some states are doing/considering that he disagrees with. Alternatively, he could have also included the idiotic ramblings of politicians in other states and the nonsensical gun control measures that have been proposed and or passed by the other side of the aisle in response to his mass-shooting examples. The excerpt from the article that rings most true to me, and that I've lamented here several times recently, is the following...

Your first paragraph here is false, and assumes that the good or service you're talking about has an inelastic demand curve (i.e. people will buy the same amount of it no matter what it costs.) Not even gasoline is perfectly inelastic, so an increase in price (hurting the consumer) will always be accompanied by a decrease in quantity demanded (hurting the seller.) Your second paragraph is correct, taxes and regulations on domestic companies without corresponding tariffs on imported goods and services will tend to drive companies (or at least their income) out of the country. But this is a separate issue from how taxes are borne by each party to a transaction.

Ya, you said that once already You and I disagree Nothing new I guess...... Dan is at least mostly correct here, even if a bit impatient and unclear about it. It doesn't matter if you include taxes or fees above or below the line, the tax affects both parties to the transaction. This is because no demand curve is perfectly inelastic. How much it affects each party depends. The wiki article on the subject is reasonably well written.

Some people here simply do not seem to understand the difference between facts and opinion. you mean like requesting "DATA" for a predictive social response to a hypothesized economic stimulus? you can't simplify the economic models, there's too much interference legislated into reality to get any worthwhile predictive result. All you can do is have a bunch of economists argue various alternatives and then pick whichever version your personal bias wants to choose to hear. Trying to isolate out the effects on the overall economy or on a group of people of a single variable like a minimum wage involves adjusting for so many other variables that you're invariably going to wind up "adjusting" yourself into whatever conclusion you're predisposed to believing. An interesting shift of the burden of proof that I'm seeing here, that I don't think people even realize they're doing, is in proposing a change for the purpose of helping a group of people, and then demanding opponents provide proof that this proposal will do anything but help said group.

Very happy about game one today, and glad we won by 2 so that people whining about the penalty Bollig drew can HTFU. Should be a good series. Also, I noticed that when Crawford is in a bad situation the rest of the team is there to step up with good stick work to stop the goal. When Quick is in a bad situation Voynov is there to kick the puck into the net.

Thank you Corey! Alright, who's next?

Your initial question to him... ...was close minded because it was a false dichotomy. Laws get written for reasons all over the spectrum between altruism and malfeasance. Once on the books they get enforced in different ways over the same spectrum. Personally, I believe that most laws are initially dreamed up with good intentions but what happens between then and an enforcement action leaves room for all sorts of possibilties, you don't really have a choice for that viewpoint. Also, he then stated this opinion... Which is technically correct (the best kind of correct.) Most laws are there because either a special interest group (big or small) asked for them, or the government wrote them of their own accord to be able to collect money. Laws written for these purposes can, again, be anywhere on that scale of good to bad. You replied with this... Which is misrepresenting his statement, ignoring the special interest group part of his comment. The primary function of a stop sign is to exist because someone asked for it to be there. It could be just a dangerous intersection without one (good thing someone asked in that case!) It could be because the person who's house its in front of felt that people went too fast and he doesn't like those damn kids who go too fast (okay, he might have a point.) It could also just be one of many stop signs the people in the neighborhood put up with the intention of making their street a pain in the ass to pass through, thereby making traffic a nightmare for others and/or just dumping it on someone else's street. (classic NIMBY crap where the loudest person wins.)

While the Cookie Fuel with a "roller mount" and a cutaway system is one of the safer ways to jump with a gopro on your head it's not low profile. There are a several things that can go wrong when it comes to extra snag points and malfunctions. You can have a main bridle snag it which could mean a pilot chute in tow, a horseshoe, or could result in you swimming in your main canopy. You could have a main line group or riser snag it on deployment which will probably result in a wild spinning malfunction. You could have a line group or riser snag it when you cutaway which, again will likely result in a wild spinning malfunction. You could have part of your reserve deployment system snag it if you deploy while tumbling away from a cutaway which can prevent your reserve from opening. You could have your reserve pilot chute dance in your burble and wrap around it even if you deploy from a stable body position. And, of course, any of these could also injure and/or incapacitate you. Any RSL is going to make worse situations where you cut away your main and the risers leave the rings but the main doesn't leave you. On the other hand, a skyhook/MARD could actually help prevent the last couple scenarios I talked about if the reserve bridle was the only thing that was going to get wrapped around the snag point. So the trade-offs are a little different with a skyhook vs a traditional RSL, but there's a trade-off either way between the above situations and all the other skydiving situations where an RSL can help you and there's no snagging going on. Remember when making the trade, and this is going to sound stupid but it's important, adding a snag point to your helmet does not eliminate and replace the problems RSLs are meant to help with, it just adds to them.

1) See strange activity. 2) type in license plate. 3) receive hit that vehicle is stolen. 4) circle around to see activity of people getting out of vehicle. 5) double check plate of vehicle against stolen vehicle report. 6) realize I fat fingered the license plate. 7) don't detain and shoot people.

Red dots are not "parallax free." Their design allows them to correct for parallax very well at a range of distances over which they were designed to be used, but there's no magic trick to overcome trigonometry. http://www.bullseyepistol.com/dotsight.htm

In addition to the parallax that Amazon mentioned, this would restrict the ability to aim the rifle ambidextrously and it would move the CG of the rifle off-center which can make it a bit more clumsy. If you practice with it, the CG thing might not be that big a deal though. With the different stock and mount options out there that allow for a range of heights you shouldn't need to crane your neck to look through an optic.

You do realize you sound exactly like the "where are the Muslims denouncing terrorists?" People, right? That said, of course death threats against the store owner and/or smart gun manufacturer are not an appropriate way to deal with this. Repealing garbage firearm laws like the one in New Jersey that triggers mandates on the availability of guns with bracelets or the one in California that recently went into effect requiring new handguns to implement micro stamping technology in order to be added to the roster (police exempt in both cases, of course) is the way to go. Or so you would think. The problem I run into is I can't even get my state "representatives" to reply to my correspondence (aside from that they now spam me) regarding the annual deluge of new gun laws, so repealing ones on the books seems a bit of a long shot. Also, I doubt I could expect much help from those who smugly deny the existence of bad gun control measures. The only real viable avenue to get rid of these things is to let them take effect and then go to court and hope the court throws it out as unconstitutional. The probability of any new gun control measure introduced in California being unconstitutional is rapidly approaching 1.

When you get down into smaller main sizes it gets easier to downsize without changing your container because cross-braced canopies have much more material for a given size (if you decide to go really small) and because the absolute sizes of the canopy aren't changing that much, so it's easier to keep that larger reserve. I have two rigs (mirages) one is an MT and one is an MX-1/2. The MT holds a PDR-126 very nicely (might be able to put an optimum 143 in there, haven't tried), and I've jumped it with a Sabre2 135 down to a Velo 90. That's an enormous range of downsizing in terms of performance and the number of jumps it requires as compared to, say, going from a 210 to a 190 to a 170 which would be more of a stretch for a rig (pun intended.) At no point did I feel compelled to get a rig with a smaller reserve.

It's pretty well established that one of kallend's hobbies on this forum is not implying things, but stating that a 1/4 million (sorry, MILLION) guns come into the hands of criminals by way of legal gun owners' carelessness is a clear indictment of victims of theft. But it doesn't matter. Some were careless, some were not. Even if the issue is examined/discussed further, what will happen is not an agreement to do sensible things to fix that issue. What will happen is the use of anecdotes, people's imagination, and wild sweeping generalizations to rationalize support for political candidates on both sides who have their heads in their asses and couldn't be bothered to listen to the few of us who, regardless of what letter is next to their name, actually write them with concerns about what is and what isn't being done.

Or as a vacuum. Under certain circumstances Concrete Rebound Hammer will generate a vacuum.

Never allow two concrete rebound hammers to strike one another... ...ever.

The fourth amendment is one of my favorites, but this case and the article you're linking to here are loaded with derp. The article says "reasonable probable cause" is the new standard but that isn't a standard and it is not what the decision says. The saying for this case should be, "Regardless of whether you've done something wrong, as long as you don't go all Jim Carrey from the movie Liar Liar when you get pulled over then you have nothing to fear." Also: if you're going to do something illegal, only do one illegal thing at a time.

The Kennesaw, GA (pop. 30,000) law... I can't speak for the right wingers you refer to but I haven't complained about this law primarily because while it was being passed I was busy being gestated and also a contributing factor is that it doesn't actually force you to do anything. It, and copy-cat versions of it being passed in a handful of small towns, are toothless symbolic gestures. I think symbolic gestures are a stupid use of the legislative process, but that's another issue. The ACA (and state and local laws being passed against firearm ownership) are not merely symbolic gestures, so I rate the comparison 2/10. In the meantime, hopefully the two people that were more seriously injured in the shooting pull through.

From the video in the article it appears the suspect gets out of his car and walks away from the officers and their patrol cars towards a long set of stairs that leads down to the beach. Around the time he gets near the top of the stairs the police apparently fire a couple rubber rounds at him (that is obscured in the video though) At that point he starts running down the stairs. When he gets to the bottom of the stairs he gets shot several times from officers out of frame and goes down. No one is in view of the camera at the bottom of the stairs besides the suspect up to the point where he is shot up and for over a minute afterwords so it's impossible to tell from how far away he was shot. > 10-15 ft though and it doesn't look like he saw them until after he went down. The story from the cops who shot him was that they assumed the beanbag shots were the suspect shooting at people and so they shot him on sight.

I - Can't be sure, but . . . I - Remember something about it . . . . . . Shit, I just dome see it. I was on the fence between that line and "Studies show reposters are linked by those with functional long term memory to threads about the same article from four years ago when the reposter was the first to respond in the original thread." I think it's particularly funny that kallend laments the departure of Marg in that thread.

What is CRS linked to? http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3808574

chest vs head? sounds much more painful for the criminal. And I don't see how a closed or open casket has anything to do with the stock 'torture/vengeance meme'.... I'm a big fan of 'death by snu-snu' RDX. (Kidding... I agree with kallend on this one.)

Sounds pretty Libertarian to me. Let's expand it to a lot of other groups, too, and I'm with you. I can't say that I've noticed many other religions trying to get their dogma encoded as law in the USA, or having a motto in support on every coin in my pocket, or trying to get their displays on courthouse doors or outside public buildlings, or even whining that there is a war declared against them. As soon as I see "In Allah We Trust" or "In Vishnu We Trust" on a US coin I'll agree with you 100%. ...and then he says "I said 'groups' not just 'religions'"... ...and then you pick one or two of the actions from the list above that only applies to religious groups, ignore the rest, and assert the presense of those actions means those are the ONLY groups he could possibly have been talking about and he is therefore wrong and/or misguided by your evaluation... ...then he and everyone else rolls our eyes at you...

Conveniently labeling an obnoxious and intrusive practice a "major tenet of one's faith" does not make it any less obnoxious or intrusive. That's just self-enabling of bad behavior.I suppose as one matures in the faith and has time to hone their skills more tactful approaches can be implemented. Did you know that most spam e-mail (the 80% figure comes up a lot) is propagated by hijacking the resources of the unsuspecting and dimwitted.