Nightingale

Keeping your tower in a closed cabinet can make your computer more likely to overheat due to the lack of cool air circulation.

You are right. They do not have to help anyone being assualted. The 'to serve and protect" often seen on police cars only pertains to the state and not the people. Everyone is a suspect in the eyes of the police. Actually, the police owe a duty to "the people" of their jurisdiction as a whole, but not to the individual (I think mainly so you can't sue them if they don't get to you fast enough).

I support the ENTIRE bill of rights, including the 1st and 2nd amendments. I believe that every decision made by the government should be thoroughly questioned by the people.

Rate of injury doesn't really present an accurate perspective either, though. For example: I used martial arts (physical force) to resist an attacker. I was slightly injured in the attack (sprained wrist), but was a lot less injured than I'd have been had I done nothing. Would I have been better off with a gun? Probably. I was cornered in a back alley by someone who was chasing me. Would I have had to shoot him? Maybe, but he probably would have run away if he saw I was armed.

The wiper is more of a danger than a cut finger... but, what's more dangerous to the public: a broken wiper or a case of measles in an unvaccinated population?

That's probably similar to the way the public only hears about the skydiving incidents, rather than the million+ non-incident skydives, so they all think the sport is incredibly dangerous and we're all going to be lawn darts on our next jump.

(((HUGS)))

The problem with health as opposed to gas is that if you don't see a doctor, your health problem can get much worse. You can go from a case of strep throat to a cardiac infection, or from a cut finger to necrotizing fascitis (how the heck do you spell that?). If you skip the doc visit because you can't afford it, then the taxpayers (and everybody else who visits the hospital) end up picking up your medical bills if you end up in the hospital. If your car runs out of gas, you call a friend and have them bring you a gallon.

You'll probably still get the tax credit to cover some of what you and your employer pay out. Many medical expenses are already deductible, even though most people don't bother. Also, if everyone has insurance, even if subsidized by the taxpayers, you will probably be paying less in the long run to subsidize other people's health care. The reason for this is that emergency room visits are by far the most expensive kind of doctor visit, but ERs are currently the only place someone without insurance can reliably go for care. Many of these visits can be prevented by making doctors and urgent care clinics available to everyone. If you can go to the doctor for your strep throat, you will, and it'll cost maybe three hundred bucks, including a course of antibiotics. If you wait to see if the infection gets worse because you don't have insurance, you'll probably wait until that same case of strep gets so bad you end up in the ER, and by that time, you could be looking at a cardiac infection and days of hospitalization, which you will receive under the current system, regardless of your ability to pay. So, three hundred dollar doctor visit, or thirty-thousand dollar ER/hospital visit? Insurance companies have already realized that with good preventative care, healthcare overall is cheaper. Is it better to pay for a measles vaccine, or a hospital stay? Cholesterol lowering medications or arterial bypass surgery? How many people could receive a measles vaccine for the cost of tha hospital stay? How many years of pills would equal the cost of that surgery? Its often cheaper to pay for hundreds of people to receive preventative care than for one to end up in the hospital or OR. Of course, not every disease is preventable, but if we can prevent the medical issues that we can in as many people as possible, our health care costs would drop, not rise.

Exactly. Very well put, Bill. That's what I was trying to say, but you said it better.

I haven't jumped since 2005, mainly because I was a law student and too busy and too broke. After the bar exam, I sprained my ankle and couldn't jump for 6 months, and now that the ankle is better, my CYPRES is out of date, so I'm saving my money for that, and still not jumping. My friends that I met skydiving are still my friends. Several of us are doing the AIDS Walk together.

I'd suggest starting HERE. City of Chicago Human Resources. I'd also suggest Los Angeles, if you're willing to relocate. www.lacity.org Year round skydiving! Edited to add: you could also go back to school.

Yeah, I can imagine how that would go. "In this lesson we are going to look at how Jesus invented the morality upon which modern civilisation relies" I was thinking about something more like teaching how religion and superstition based on religious ideas influenced the spread of the black plague, or how California was influenced by the beliefs of missionaries and the creation of the missions here. The bible and christianity has influenced the development of American and European society. To ignore that is to turn a blind eye to a significant part of history. History doesn't just teach what happened when. It needs to show WHY what happened when. Otherwise, you just have a bunch of disconnected pieces and can't assemble the puzzle.

Which numbers specifically and why? Poll: Founders Put God in Constitution Wednesday, September 12, 2007 8:19 PM A majority of Americans believe that America’s founding fathers wrote Christianity into the Constitution, a new poll reveals. The survey by the First Amendment Center, a non-partisan educational group, found that 55 percent of respondents erroneously believe the Constitution establishes a Christian nation. Three out of four people who say they are evangelical or Republican feel that way, while only about half of Democrats and independents agree. even the article itself says that respondents ERRONEOUSLY believe that the constitution establishes a Christian nation. I'm guessing they haven't actually read it, because I have and I'd love to know where it says that. The poll also found that only 56 percent think freedom of religion applies to all groups “regardless of how extreme their beliefs are.” That’s down from 72 percent in a similar poll in 2000. so 46% of people are okay with freedom to believe whatever, but only if someone else thinks the beliefs are not too extreme. Whose business is it of theirs what religion someone else is or how extreme they want to make it? “We are seeing the product of years of not teaching the First Amendment at a young age,” said Gene Policinski, the center’s executive director. That is so true! Other poll results reported by USA Today include: # 58 percent of respondents said teachers in public schools should be permitted to lead prayers. I don't have a problem with teachers leading prayers to voluntary groups of students who want them, outside of class. I do have a problem with teachers leading prayers in class to a captive audience. School prayer in that manner is unconstitutional, because a teacher is an employee of the government and in a position of authority there, and the government can't promote religion. # Half said teachers should be allowed to use the Bible as a factual source in history class. well, the Bible's not a history book; it's a religion book, so a public school history teacher can't open it, present it as fact, and teach the young earth theory. However, I wouldn't have a problem with history teachers using the bible to present, say, an example of oral tradition among tribal people in the middle east, or to use the book as a supplement to show how Christianity influenced the development of society. It would just need to be placed in it's historical context and studied as an influential historical document, not as religious truth. # 43 percent said public schools should be permitted to put on Nativity re-enactments – up from 36 percent in 2005. reenactments for what purpose? to promote religion, or as an exercise for an after-school optional drama club? I'd be okay with the second, but not the first, and attendance would, of course, have to be optional. Students could probably learn a lot from a drama club activity, and students present plays involving religious figures all the time. Most high schools have put on Antigone or Romeo and Juliet, and both of those contain reference to various deities.

There called little people don't you know? No, no, no. You see, in the "industry", the "midgets" are the ones that show up for Wizard of Oz casting calls, and the "little people" are the ones you step all over to get to where you are, and then, of course, you "thank the little people" in your award acceptance speech.

True. There's a difference between wishing to die and being willing to die if it comes to that. Some people are willing to accept the risk of death in Iraq. Others are not.

Those numbers are truly frightening.

I don't feel "safer" because in researching guns, I've seen the crime statistics, and in learning martial arts, I've talked with victims. A lot of them. A lot of people feel silly being scared to walk down a dark street alone. They tell themself "nothing is going to happen." and walk there anyway. And most of the time, nothing does happen. And that just reinforces the naive bubble that nothing bad will happen, so they do it again and again. And eventually, something does happen. I don't feel safer because I've taken a hard look at the part of society that wants to hurt other people. I know they're out there, and I know that it's possible that I might be a victim of that someday. I feel more prepared to deal with the situation if it does happen. Putting on a seatbelt doesn't make me safe from drunk drivers. Carrying a gun doesn't make me safe from crime. Both do a little more to prepare me for a situation, should it arise.

The first tenet of self defense is to not get into a situation in the first place. The second is to get out of it without risk to life/limb. If handing over your wallet will make them go away (and most of the time, it will!) do it.

I draw the line when someone I care about is personally in danger. Wallet, car, whatever, not important, let them have it. Real, physical threat that could result in injury or loss of life: important. fight back.

Your Sunday mornings?

I'd have given them the wallet rather than start a confrontation. You never know if they might be armed too. If all they want is money, it's not worth your life.

Well, it says they're not sure it was vandalism... a "light, oily substance"?? seems like a vandal would use something more damaging. Maybe this is simply a case of someone using the wrong cleaning product.

I'm not british, but do I feel safer with my gun? No. Allow me to explain: I own two guns at the moment, a Winchester Defender 20ga shotgun and a Ruger 22/45 Mark III .22 caliber handgun. I'm currently considering the purchase of a third, an HK USP Compact 9mm and will be applying for a CCW sometime next year. I've been practicing street-oriented martial arts for 18 years, and have used martial arts to defend myself against an attack. I taught women's self defense classes for years. Martial arts provides an option where there would be no option. And I still want to carry a gun, because self defense isn't always enough. Knowing martial arts doesn't make me feel safer. Owning guns doesn't make me feel safer. If anything, learning about martial arts and learning about guns has made me feel less safe, because I've removed the "it can't happen to me" insulation that many people walk around with. I've met people bad things have happened to. I've been attacked myself. Although there are other things that can be done, such as not walking alone, that can help prevent being a victim, these aren't absolute guarantees that crime won't happen to you. Owning a gun or knowing martial arts is not going to prevent crime from happening to you. However, guns and karate give you options to deal with trouble when it does appear. And I like options. Do I feel safer? No. Do I feel more ready to deal with a bad situation? Yes.

I think a draft is a bad idea, mainly because if I was in the middle of a combat zone, I wouldn't want to trust the job of watching my back to a guy who didn't want to be there to begin with.