peacefuljeffrey

I entirely reject the notion that getting revenge for a murder is somehow "justice". The purpose of a justice system should be to reform and/or punish. It should not be to give revenge to families. _Am I don't reject the idea of PUNISHING a person with an appropriate punishment. And since a murderer took a life, he or she gets to lose life. One does not have to see it as vengeance. In fact, I do not see it as vengeance. I see it as society ridding itself of its garbage, which is necessary to the safer and happier functioning of society. When I made that comment, I was referring to the notion of WHY we decide to let convicted murderers sit on death row for 18 years when their conviction has been accomplished in the standard way in which we decide whether someone is guilty or not. We do the best we can. Just because our best is not always perfect or accurate is not a reason to just not try to make a finding of guilt, or be willing to trust that finding and act on it. I DO reject this touchy-feely new-agey bleeding-heart MODERN notion that prison is supposed to REFORM inmates. It's been used as PUNISHMENT from the beginning of civilization. We don't have the ability to make sure that someone's faulty, violent, criminal brain is successfully rewired -- and at risk in the grand experiment, should we let such a specimen back out, is the rest of the innocent population. Society does not owe it to violent criminals to spend scads of money trying to make them better people. Society does not unlimited second chances to criminals. I firmly believe that you can pass a point where society should care about you: YOU knew the rules, YOU knew right from wrong (everything tells you that murder is wrong) and you still did it. So YOU now pay the ultimate price. We don't have to pay it for you. -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

I have to give this a qualified answer. See, I understand and realize that the system we have has convicted innocent people, and will continue to do so. I don't like that reality, but that's the reality. Now, IF the system is applied in a sound, rational, egalitarian and honest way, I firmly believe in the death penalty. I believe that there are some people in society who have NO PLACE in society, because of their nature and their willingness to commit crimes against the rest of the population. They are sociopaths and I don't believe that we can come NEAR to making them "fit for society" through counseling or whatever. Furthermore, I believe that after some particular crimes, one has FORFEITED his right to live, indeed his right to have anyone even CARE whether he gets another chance, or has a chance to rehabilitate himself. Sorry, fella, you shoulda thought about that before you did the crime. You can't go and rob, rape and murder a family of four and then say, "Oh, please, I can become a 'productive member of society' again, just imprison me and counsel me!" Here, I got somethin' for ya: How about a nice, heaping bowl of 'Too Fuckin' Bad"?! So, if we use as a given premise that the system itself will not function in a corrupt way, I believe that the death penalty is good and proper. I also acknowledge that NO system made by man can be 100% accurate and flawless, so yes, even in the fairest application of the death penalty (even with no malfeasance involved), we will have some percentage of wrongful convictions. And I guess I feel that I would rather see that one good faith wrongful conviction (again, stipulating no malfeasance in sending an innocent man to death just to have a prosecutor's numbers look good) than to see 100 actually guilty men go free. Why? Because those 100 men will do far more harm in their future crimes than the harm of that one in one thousand wrongly being sentenced to death. I think of the people who have been harmed by parolees who really should have been in prison, and I think, "Hey, we're talking about MURDERERS being set free in error (hypothetically)! That's even WORSE!" -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Another vote/suggestion for you to join us at SoBe. There's nothin' like our sunset loads, man. It's just beeeeaooootiful! Great plane, great crowd, great LZ.

People say this in view of the fact that the convict gets to spend that time in prison, which presumably is not pleasant. The problem is that it leaves the family of a person who's been murdered hanging, waiting for justice, for that length of time, too. I'm not familiar with the case cited. Specifics, someone? -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

There's always... "BEATINGU" -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Mr. Burns, in a Grinch impersonation: "Look at them all through the darkness I'm bringing -- they're not sad at all! They're actually singing! They sing without juicers... They sing without blenders... They sing without Flungers, Cap-dabblers and Smendlers!" Martin: "I would have thought that being in the center of a nuclear explosion would have killed him!" Bart: "Now you know better!" Marge: "Homey, just this once... would you mind-" Homer: "Cutting my nails? Brushing my teeth?" Marge: "Would you wear the Mr. Plow jacket?" Homer: "Our forecast calls for flurries of passion, followed by extended periods of 'gettin' it on!'" Grandpa: "We can't bust heads like we used to -- but, we have our ways. One way is tell stories that don't go anywhere. Like the time I took the ferry over to Shelbyville? I needed a new heel for my shoe. So, I took the ferry over to Morganville -- which is what they called Shelbyville at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on 'em! 'Give me five bees for a quarter,' you'd say. So, I tied an onion to my belt -- which was the style at the time. Now, you couldn't get white onions, because of the war. All you could get were those biiig yellow ones..." Homer: "OOH! SUPER-FUN-HAPPY SLIDE!!!" Lisa: "Da-a-a-d!" Homer: "Oh, alright. I guess killing will be fun enough!" Homer: "The only way to kill a vampire, is with a wooden stake through the heart!" Lisa: "Um, Dad? That's his crotch." Ralph: "Mr. Simpson, the tar fumes are making me dizzy!" Homer: "Yeah, they'll do that." Old lady neighbor: "That's my brother, Asa. He died in the war... held a grenade too long..." Homer: "Son, a woman is a lot like... a refrigerator. Six feet tall... about 300 pounds... they make...ice. No, waitaminute, a woman is more like a beer! They look good; they smell good; you'd step over your own mother just to get one... But you can't stop at one! You want to drink another woman!" Homer: "Sszo then I says to him, 'You want that munney, come and finnd it... 'cauz I don't know where it isz, ya baloney!" Adam West: "The only real Cat Woman was Lee Meriwether, Julie Newmar, and Eartha Kitt! And how come Batman doesn't dance anymore? Remember the Batusi? Oooh, chaa, umm, chaaa...!" Mr. Burns: "Alive, we'll put him on Broadway. Dead, we'll sell monkey stew to the army!" Native: "Mosee tatupu! Mosee tatupu!" Marge: "What's he saying?" Mr. Burns: "Uh, he's saying, 'We wouldn't dream of sacrificing the blue-haired woman!'" Homer: "Marge, don't discourage the boy! Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals... except the weasel." Homer: "I am so smart, I am so smart. S-M-R-T! uhhI mean S-M-A-R-T!" Homer: "Marge, I ate those fancy soaps you got for the bathroom!" Marge: "Ooh, look, we got a free sample of Lemontine!" Homer: "Oooh, give it here, Marge!" Marge: "Homer, that's dishwashing liquid!" Homer: "Yeah, but what are ya gonna do?" Troy: "Hi, I'm Troy McClure! You might remember me from such thrillers as, "Dial M, for Murderousness, and The Erotic Adventures of Hercules." Skinner: "Hmph. That's two independent-thought alarms in one day!" Willie: "I TOLD ya that colored chalk was forged by Lucifer himself!" Lyle Lanley: "No sir, there's nothin' on earth like a genuine, bona fide electrified six-car monorail!" "I've sold monorails to Brockway, Ogdenville and North Haverbrook, and by gum it put them on the map!" Robert Goulet: "Are you sure this is the casino? I'd better call my manager..." Nelson: "Your manager says for you to shut up!" Goulet: "Vera said that??" Homer: "Relax, Marge: it's just our life's savings -- I'm not going to go into hock for this!" Homer: "Hello, my name is Mr. Burns... I believe you have a letter for me?" Postal clerk: "Okay, sure thing Mr. Burns... ahh, what's your first name?" Homer: "I - don't - know..." Homer: "When I was your age, I really wanted a catcher's mitt, but my dad wouldn't get it for me. So I held my breath until I passed out and banged my head on the coffee table. Doctors thought I might have brain damage..." Bart: "Uhh, dad, is there a point to this story?" Homer: "I like stories..." Lisa's Orthodontist: "This one is the scraper... this one is the poker... and this happy little fellow we call the gouger." "Hold still, while I GAS you!" Dr.:

I guess I don't understand how it is that one can claim to have a lock on how many claims were "false" and how many were true. Doesn't that presuppose that every finding of "true" or "false" is unerring? Well, it sounds from your statements as though there is some way to be unequivocally sure that once there's been a conviction, that was a "true" claim. Also, people claim to somehow know how many unreported cases of something go unreported. (You mentioned "70%" earlier.) How can one arrive at a figure for that? If they're unreported and yet you know how many happened, isn't that a sort of paradox? Besides, it seems like we're more-or-less in agreement that this CA case is one of "false conviction" i.e. it wasn't rape but got decided that it was. Which category would you drop THIS one into? Which stat goes up? The number of actual reported rapes w/convictions, or the number of falsely claimed rapes? In this case there was a conviction, but it seems that 6 idiot judges are about the only ones on the planet who seem to think this was really a case of rape. -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Nope, never been. And looking back on some of the things I did as an idiot high-school student, I realize I am lucky I didn't get picked up for some of my hijinks. ("Hijinks?!" Did I really just say "hijinks?!") NO more details forthcoming. I don't know what the statute of limitations is on most of the stuff I did... -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

I gotta go with Jimbo here... I can't fathom your way of thinking on this subject. Especially the "If my number comes up, so be it" part. I can't help but think that if this were applied to just about anything else besides arming yourself for the possibility that you may need a gun to save your own life (or someone else's), you wouldn't agree with the same statement you just made. If you were crossing the street, you could either be proactive and save your own life by looking both ways before jaunting across, or you could simply step out into traffic and "hope." If you were going to go water-skiing, you could protect against wiping out and drowning by wearing a PFD, or you could just chance it and say, "If I'm not good enough, then surviving a wipeout just wasn't meant to be, for me." If you were skydiving, you could protect against losing consciousness and plummeting to your death by utilizing an AAD. Or you could say, "I guess I just wasn't meant to survive that skydive." In any of those cases, if you did not do what is simple and reasonable to protect yourself, you could simply say, "Well, if my 'number's not up,' I won't need these things to save me, because everything will just work out fine if I stay passive." That's not the case. Part of having your number NOT be up is "what did I do to make my situation safer to begin with?" What if you look at in that way: Your number is not up BECAUSE you took steps to keep it from being drawn 'this time'? I mean, put two people on the water skis... One with and one without a vest. If they have identical wipeouts, get knocked out, one drowns because he had no vest, the other is afloat and rescued when the boat comes around. Is it really accurate to say that the former's number "was just up," but that the latter's "number simply wasn't up," or do you attribute his survival to his foresight and resultant use of sensible safety measures? I mean, this "what are ya gonna do if your 'number's up' thing can be applied so arbitrarily as to make it meaningless. I always thought it was something that people said of a person who bought the farm because something happened that was beyond their control -- not that they just gave up any attempt at self-preservation and left their fate to chance. You don't drive around without a seatbelt on, do you? I hope not. Because that's another area where one could just easily say, "Nah, I'm not gonna wear one because I'll be fine as long as my number's not up. And if some drunk driver out there has my name on his bumper, well, that's the way it goes." The fact remains that it just isn't true that "there's nothing I can do about it." Plus, no one ever suggested here that we have to relish the idea of killing another person in order to find ourselves willing to do so if it's a "him or me" situation involving being the innocent victim of a criminal attack. There's no shame or immorality to killing someone in such a case. ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Still no kiss-passes here, either. Of course, it would help if I was ever involved in anything but a friggin' ONE-way! With 58 jumps now, I was in on a four-way once (all guys) and a two-way (with Kim at SoBe -- but no kiss), and I was also on Kim's 500th in what was supposed to be a hybrid but it didn't get fully formed. So I guess I'm not impossible to dock with, but I wouldn't say I have any kind of great freefly skills at this point I'm only just now learning to sit. If anyone I know is reading this -- I promise I won't get you killed, so invite me to jump with you!!! ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Yeah, well fuck YOU -- I'll bet you didn't see it in a THEATER!! LOL! ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

I knew that one -- and I like it when applied as a sig.

WHAAAAA???? I'm a SoBe regular and I never heard of this little jaunt! I can't believe it happened on a day I didn't get out there and I missed it! When did you all do this? Anyway, fun post, man. And if and when that dealie goes down again, I am ON IT! Count me in! ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Add another "welcome!" Sounds cool that you're so excited about learning to fly! I have 58 jumps and about 10 of them are on a rig I bought very recently. (Yes, it's my first, and I bought beer.) I waited a while, in part because I wasn't finding an abundance of appropriate rigs to buy used. I let a lot of people around my DZ know that I was in the market, and people actually brought rigs to me to check out. I ended up buying one that was just handed to me with a "try this on" and no other explanation. As I was unquestioningly putting it on, I asked the guy, "Um, since I'm trying this on I might as well ask you: am I doing this because it's, maybe, offered for sale?" He said, "Exactly!" and from there I got opinions on the rig from our rigger and other instructors. (It was a nearly new container, in fact.) I got what I felt was really reliable and trustworthy guidance about it -- to the point where I was instructed to NOT buy the main that came with it, but to ask if I could leave that out and get a different one. That's what I did. I ended up with a Javelin J2 and a Lotus 170, and I'm quite happy. I do also think that pre-AFF is a little bit too soon to be making plans and checking out rigs. You don't yet know how to pack, you probably don't know your way around the anatomy of a rig, either. In short, there is muuuuuch you will be learning in the next few weeks or months that will aid you in making a decision on a rig so that you don't end up wishing for a new one too soon after purchase. Good luck, be safe, and have a load of fun! ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Glad I was not the first one to cite these. EXCELLENT movies.

Wow, I keep answering right in line with the majority on these things! Um, I said "long distance relationships work, with love" because I believe it. If the two of you feel the way you say you do, it sounds like it's solid except for the distance thing and the difficult circumstances. I think that if you do the "drop everything" thing and get together, eventually the difficulties that will immediately follow will eventually be overcome and forgotten. (i.e. a new job can always be obtained after a bit of possible hardship) If you two are as strongly in love as is implied, there is no reason to let JOBS or whatever stand in the way. Jobs are just what we do so that we can sustain our lives. They are not supposed to trump what we WANT in our lives. (EDIT): WHOOPS! I guess that instead of answering "LDR work" I should have done the "DROP EVERYTHING" answer. That's more what I meant. ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Glad you didn't get caught up in it and possibly hurt. What you described is preferable to some cracked-up scumbag saying, "Empty the register!" Is it possible to find alternate employment? I don't see whatever you're making as being worth the risk to your safety. Good luck. ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

I answered 2-4, but I'm not jumping "tomorrow," I'm jumping Sunday. I hope that counts. Tomorrow I'll be rollerblading instead, and hanging with a couple of friends, eating out somewhere, and cruising downtown. I'd jump 6-8 times in a day if I didn't keep running into this problem with the fact that I pack slower than molasses in January. It's all I can do to pack in time for every-other-jump. Plus, my last few openings were kinda hard, particularly the single jump I did on Monday. My neck and back have been recovering all week and are gonna be just about good enough to jump on Sunday -- but I can see it getting reinjured in a hurry if I don't find a way to pack slower openings. Fingers crossed. ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

(edit: I wrote my post before realizing you were saying "limited to 7 letters. Why is that? Everywhere I've ever been, you could get a total of EIGHT characters! Sorry my suggestions don't really help you, but I'll leave them because they may help somebody else.) That is SOOO funny -- I voted DOOOOOR and it turns out that's been most popular so far. I think that one's hilariously good! I guess there's always SKYDIVER (duh) FREEFALR FREEFLYR PARACHUT IMAJUMPR DOUSKYDV ISKYDIVE There must be countless others I'm not partial to getting myself a vanity plate even though I like them when I see them. I found myself considering "FLYDIVER" because I'm a pilot and skydiver. I'll probably never get it, though. ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Full agreement. Note, they say that "assault weapons are equipped with combat hardware, such as silencers, folding stocks and bayonets, which are not found on sporting guns." This wording implies that they always are found with these things. This is a blatant lie. They have not classified the Colt Match Target H-Bar (an AR-15 post-ban rifle with no flash suppressor, folding stock, bayonet lug, etc.) as a NON-assault weapon in spite of the fact that it is produced without the offending accoutrements. What so-called "assault weapons" that we could buy before the ban had SILENCERS on them?! NONE that I ever knew of. Silencers are in the same "Class III" category as full-auto machine guns, as far as difficulty in legally purchasing. These guns are made for shooting from the hip?! Are they fucking insane?! I don't know of ANY gun that is "made" for shooting from the hip. Even full-auto M-16s are not INTENDED to be fired from the hip. My Colt H-BAR AR-15 has adjustable sights on it. Is that consistent with being made not for aimed-fire, but for shooting from the HIP? Fuckin' lying scumbag anti-gunners. Any lie that gets people to vote anti-gun is just fine with them. ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Much as I hate Sharpton for being a worthless opportunist, I think the Brawley case was not of his doing. She claimed to have been attacked and he made a political opportunity of it. Then her claims were found to be lies and he was stuck. He does plenty of other stuff to dislike, but I think he just got suckered like everyone else on that one. Something woulda been wrong with telling the country that he just found out she had been lying all along, pulling his support for her, and apologizing for being so strident in accusing white police officers of a brutal racist attack without all the facts? As far as I know, he never renounced the lying bitch. This shitwad ruined the lives of several good people because she was gonna be home late with no excuse to give her momma. Do you realize that? ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Sharpton is a piss-poor example. He, with his fellow "Black Three Stooges" members, Mason and Maddox, makes his living off racial shakedowns, just like Jesse Jackson. The bogus Tawana Brawley case is only one egregious example among many. He's not fit to wait on tables in DC. mh No, but the people of DC are moronic enough that they'd probably gladly make him mayor -- or if not, at least a police officer. ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Was this NBC, the outfit that used model rocket motors to ignite the truck fuel tank to prove how dangerous the truck was? Of course, BATFE now has it in for hobby rocket motors - more than 2 oz of propellant and you need a FBI background check (including fingerprinting)! Exactly, Kallend. NOW do you see why we look with contemptuous skepticism on just about ANY proposed regulation regarding firearms? They generally come from people who attempt to foment support for their cause by MISREPRESENTING THE ISSUE FROM THE VERY FIRST. This is because if all the facts of the issue are looked at honestly, those facts reliably back the pro-gun side. The only way they were able to make a case against full auto was to LIE about the notion that semi-autos could not accomplish the same damage (and they did this by focusing on a target that they were deliberately missing). And you say yourself that BATFE now wants to govern MODEL ROCKET MOTORS? Nawww, that's not a power grab! Here is the text of an article I just read, about support for an "assault weapons ban" in MD. Note carefully that there is no anti-gun response to the statement that the DC snipers used aimed fire, not bullet-sprays -- and that any NON-banned gun could be used to accomplish the same exact murders. Md. ban would outlaw sale of 45 long guns, copycats By Kimberly A.C. Wilson Sun Staff Originally published February 4, 2004 As momentum builds for a statewide assault weapons ban to replace a federal one that is expiring, all eyes are on Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr., who voted against the federal law while in Congress. Ehrlich said yesterday that he hasn't taken a position on legislation introduced in the Senate by Montgomery County Sen. Robert J. Garagiola and being prepared in the House by Del. Neil F. Quinter, that would expand the state's 1994 ban on assault pistols to include assault rifles and weapons that share their characteristics. The bills have attracted 69 co-sponsors. The issue places Ehrlich in an unenviable position: Backing the ban would be a reversal of his previous positions on the issue and a source of consternation for his rural and conservative constituents, who were hoping the state would shed its anti-gun reputation. But if he opposes it - while memories of the sniper shootings and trials are still fresh in Marylanders' minds - the move could expose an Achilles' heel of his carefully tended image as a moderate Republican. "Politically, it's going to be very difficult for him to walk away from his conservative base on this," said Donald F. Norris, professor of public policy at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. "And if he reverses his position in this state, I am not sure that it does him a lot of good with the gun-control crowd because they tend not to be inclined to vote for conservative Republicans. I can't imagine Montgomery County going for Ehrlich just because of one vote on assault weapons," Norris said. Yesterday, Ehrlich straddled the fence while voicing doubts that a ban would lower crime in a state whose largest city remains one of the country's most violent. Proven strategies are the only cure, he said. "We devote our time, money, energy and resources to things that work - not things that sound politically correct," the governor said. As a state delegate, Ehrlich voted in 1994 to keep Maryland from becoming one of a handful of states with some sort of military weapons ban. As a freshman congressman, he voted with other Republican lawmakers in a failed effort to repeal the federal assault weapons ban in 1996. The proposed state ban would grandfather in legally registered firearms covered by the new law, while prohibiting new sales or registrations of 45 named guns. In addition, the state Handgun Roster Board, which tracks newly manufactured pistols and adds those that match characteristics of previously banned assault handguns to the state's list of prohibited weapons, would also monitor copycat assault rifles. And a provision of the bill allows Maryland dealers who have stocks of the banned firearms on Sept. 14 to sell their supply. Sen. Brian E. Frosh, chairman of the Judicial Proceedings Committee, backs the legislation -- despite reservations about the dealer provision. "That's nothing I would want to see in a perfect bill," Frosh said. "Still, when you boil it all down, the ban becomes for me an issue of common sense. I mean, there are plenty of ways you can bring down a deer and defend yourself without these rifles." The Maryland bills come as states across the country scramble to create new law before the 1994 federal ban on assault weapons, which the Republican-controlled Congress appears unlikely to renew, expires on Sept. 13, 2004. "I don't think that anybody wants to see these guns back on the street after the ban expires," Garagiola said. Lawmakers noted specific instances to buttress their point: the 1989 Stockton, Calif., school shootings that left five children dead and 39 wounded; Columbine, Colo., where a pair of students killed 13 and wounded 20; and the 2002 D.C.-area sniper shootings that injured three and killed 10, six of them in Maryland. Convicted snipers John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo used a Bushmaster AR-15, a civilian version of the M-16, during the shootings. The weapon, a modified semiautomatic assault rifle, isn't specifically covered by the current federal law but is named among the 45 semiautomatic rifles that could be banned in Maryland. "All this bill does is to extend it to the big guys, the assault rifles," said Leah Barrett, spokeswoman for CeaseFire Maryland, a gun-control group. "Of course the gun nuts are saying, 'slippery slope' and all that. But the sniper used this Bushmaster AR-15, and these weapons are designed to instill fear," Barrett said. But voices on the other side pointed out that the sniper shootings were the result of a gunman's aimed shot rather than a barrage of fire. "What those people did with that firearm they could have done with any other type of rifle," said John H. Josselyn, legislative vice president Associated Gun Clubs of Baltimore, which represents 26 clubs and about 4,500 gun owners in Central Maryland. Sonia Wills, whose son Conrad Johnson became the snipers' final victim, now sits on Ceasefire's board of directors. "We do need to have these weapons banned, and considering what's happened to my son, I've taken a deep interest in this issue," she said yesterday. "I knew I had to try to make a difference." Josselyn vowed to do the same, noting a public relations push that gun advocates directed at former House Speaker Casper R. Taylor Jr. in retaliation for his stance on gun locks. "He'd been in for 28 years, and we got him out." Sun staff writer David Nitkin contributed to this article. -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

So, mistletoe right by the panty-line, huh? Rrrrrrowwwwrrr! You don't really think there's a need to strongarm someone with Christmas tradition just to get kisses there, do ya? LOL! Some us are willing volunteers! ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

I haven't been skydiving very long, so that goes a long way to explaining why I have not witnessed a serious injury or fatality, nor lost any friends who skydive. It's a blessing. I don't know how I'll react if I ever see someone burn in. But I do believe it will not make me stop skydiving, just the same way numerous local airplane pilot fatalities have not put fear in me about continuing to fly as a private pilot. (I'm more scared of getting on board the planes of a corner-cutting airline and flying with a pilot I don't know from Adam.) Apparently there are many DZ.commers who have lost people close to them in skydiving accidents. I believe I bear the sorrow of that just the same as all of us do -- and the best I can do to honor the lost is to make sure I don't take skydiving for granted. ---Jeffrey -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"