Nightingale

But, since the kids weren't trained well the first time, if they think it's a drill the second time, they may not take it seriously, thinking "this is just one of those stupid drills." and goofing off, and getting hurt.

hehe. It's not something I'd do myself, but I came across some photos of it when I was doing research before I got my tattoo. Some of the healed ones are really pretty, but it looked way too painful and bloody for me to consider it, and the healing is unpredictable. As for the moralists, I couldn't care less. I made it clear what was in the pictures. If they don't like it, it's not my fault they looked.

No. I'm saying that they should've made the kids aware that it was a drill. The point of drills is to learn what to do if something happens. It's practice, and there's nothing wrong with knowing that it's practice, especially the first time, when people don't know what to do, are likely to panic, and are therefore more likely to get hurt. When I teach someone a karate technique, we walk through it slowly at first, with me giving detailed instructions. Next, we'll speed things up, run them real-time, and work out the bugs. But they know it's practice. They're not fighting for their lives. But, if something does happen to them, and it's real, they'll react as they've been trained. Doesn't matter that they knew it was practice before (as long as they took it seriously, of course), what matters is that they were trained in what to do and when to do it, and in a panic situation, the body reacts with what it's been taught. I can testify to that personally. What that school did didn't actually teach those kids anything. What they're going to remember is how scared and upset and violated they felt, rather than the procedures they were supposed to be learning. Since they weren't told about the drill this time, next time, they may not take it seriously, because they'll think it's a drill again. I agree that drills are needed, but I disagree with the method in which this particular drill was carried out.

If the photo is what I think you were describing, it's called "scarification", and you can find more photos on BME. Some of them can be really beautiful when healed. http://www.bmezine.com/scar/wayde001.html These are bloody ones. http://www.bmezine.com/scar/A60225/high/bmegl227134.jpg Here's what they look like healed. Pretty subtle compared to a tattoo.

Well, I'm not an athiest, and libertarians aren't usually considered particularly leftist, but... Maybe the problem is that guns aren't toys and war isn't a game.

And now, when there is a real emergency, the kids will think it's a drill.

Hmm... I've got 1,2, and 6 of the type A, and 3 and 4 of the type B.

If you're talking about the one of Clownburner landing, the trees are a bit farther than they look, and he was at the far end of the field. Most of the landing area was wide open space.

A few more.

I've had several people ask me about the photos I took at LP. I finally uploaded them. I attached a few of my favorites, and you can see the rest, including photos from Glacier National Park, at my website, www.nightingalesnest.net in the travel section, Montana '06. I know some of the HTML isn't right; it's computer generated and I haven't had a chance to fix it. If you're in any of the pictures and would like a larger copy, let me know and I'll email you one.

Why are you using IE to begin with? There's your problem.

Is there any branch of science for which this statement does not hold true? I think there's many branches of religion for which that statement holds true as well.

It's real. From Snopes: Assailants' making use of drugs such as Rohypnol (commonly known as "roofies") to incapacitate women and facilitate sexual assault is a genuine problem. Rohypnol (flunitrazepam) is a potent sedative that is available relatively cheaply, takes effect fairly quickly (about 20-30 minutes) after administration, typically lasts for several hours. It is especially effective as a "date rape" facilitator because it can so easily be disguised and furtively administered (typically by adding it to a drink), and (especially when combined with alcohol) it can result in the victim's experiencing a memory loss for much of the period between ingestion and recovery.

What I heard on the news was that the court ruled that gay couples should have the same practical rights as straight couples, and it was up to the legislature whether to call it marriage or something else, but the rights had to be equal.

Staffords are guaranteed, and they're not administered by the school; they're administered by a bank who pays the school on your behalf. They can't just not release student loan funds to you; it's your money. Grants might be different, but I'm not sure; I never had one.

Your financial aid holdup is because of Ws??? That's crazy. You're entitled to federal financial aid, period, unless you've committed a felony or have reached the cap (which is something like $139,000, so I doubt that's the issue). The only issue I could think of is if you took financial aid back in 84, and then dropped the entire schedule, or dropped to half-time, and didn't repay the loan. The only way a W would affect federal financial aid is if it dropped you below a "full time student" which is usually 12 credits. Talk to financial aid directly and see what they say, and come armed with info from http://studentaid.ed.gov/PORTALSWebApp/students/english/index.jsp.

Same reason I skydive... because sometimes it's fun to be scared.

Are you sure it will bring down your GPA? If it's a withdraw that gives you a 0.0 in your GPA, then it will, but if it's a withdraw that's just a W that isn't in your average, it shouldn't affect scholarships or anything. People withdraw from classes all the time. It's not really a negative thing. I had three or four Ws on my college transcript, and nobody cared. Just meant that for some reason, the schedule wasn't working out. W/0 or W/F or W/I aren't good, but just plain W is usually not an issue. Also, it's the decision of the registrar/dean whether to enforce the withdrawl dates. Maybe if you speak to one of them, something can be worked out, as it was the school's error that put you in the class to begin with?

Very well said, Darius.

http://www.eurydice.org/index.shtml This might help.

It really depends on where you live. If I get the lawyer job I want, I'll start at $75K. Which sounds good, except that money will be really tight just trying to pay the mortgate on a two bedroom condo, because I live in a pretty expensive area of California, and I'd like to keep my commute to a minimum. If I lived in Alaska, Montana, or Alabama, that'd be good money, because real-estate doesn't cost nearly as much. Here in Orange County, CA, it's about enough to pay the mortgage and for essentials, with not a ton left over for extras. For example, a 4 bedroom, 2200 square foot house in Houston, Texas costs about $155,000. In the area surrounding Washington DC, that same house would run you about $800,000. Or, a $920 mortgage versus a $3800 mortgage. (source: Coldwell Banker, 2006) So, I guess, what you consider a very good salary is going to depend on where you live.

I'd probably lay on the horn too, but I wouldn't put the car on the tracks. I've seen what happens when car meets train. Last time it happened around here about five people on the train died. The problem with this question is that any way you answer it, there's lives at risk.

Not sure about the quality of your school library, but sometimes the libraries will have copies of the books in the reference/reserved section. Sometimes even the public libraries will have them. Might be worth it to check it out. I got some of my undergrad texts from the school library, and the LA County libraries actually had a few of the grad school texts.

My Civil Rights prof apologized to us the first week of class for assigning a $250 textbook. He had no idea how much the thing cost until someone complained. Somehow, I think if professors had to purchase their copies of the texts, they'd start assigning cheaper ones, since it's mostly the quality of the teaching rather than the quality of the text that determines the quality of the class.

Maybe mom and dad bought the phone and clothes, and they're paying out of pocket for the books? That's how it was for me as an undergrad. This calendar year, I've spent over $2000 on textbooks. I think that entitles me to a bit of whining?