billeisele

Interesting how you almost demand that we answer your question when in other posts you (sometimes) willfully ignore posted facts and debate based on your opinion. To be fair, you usually provide valuable information and add interesting debate. To answer your question. It is a mechanical device that, under certain conditions, it is possible that it can go off without the person pulling the trigger. There are not enough facts to determine what really happened. The most likely cause is something in the backpack was on the trigger which caused the gun to go off. However, once the facts are revealed we'll know the answer. Of course you already knew this but just wanted someone to write it. This is not much different than a double malfunction. Without precise investigation we don't know what happened. One could just jump to the conclusion that the gear simply failed but that would be irresponsible. My question is: What law could be passed that would have absolutely prevented this? Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

or call Tony at the DZ and ask him for names Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

they have 11 snow plows, what is slowing them down is opening those little round containers of salt Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

what you guys are (poorly) discussing is - capacity factor - base load plants have capacity factors around: nuclear 92% and coal 70-90% - wind is in the range of 20-40% - things that impact capacity factor are: planned maintenance, unplanned outage(equipment failure), fuel availability and need for power from that source (intermediate plants typically coal and combined cycle plants are ramped up and down to follow the load) - fuel availabity is a non-issue for nuclear or coal, nuclear refueling outages are 18 months apart, coal plants keep 50+ days of coal stockpiled at each site, there are many mines and many delivery options, we use truck, rail and barge, don't invent an issue that doesn't exist - disagree that pump storage is as viable as you promote, it is very limited (very low capacity factor), site specific, land intensive and very few if any additional sites are available to create more pump storage - supposing that wind could deliver 2 or 4% power at a viable capacity factor (which it has never done) you still can't get rid of 2-4% of conventional generation, yes the wind generation displaces the instant need for the other energy source, but when the wind doesn't blow you need the conventional source - that brings me back to my earlier point that has not been answered - why install expensive (more expensive than conventional sources, even nuclear) renewable generation that is not reliable (with a sufficient capacity factor) if you still have to have the conventional source? - consumers end up paying for both unless certain individuals are willing to be "turned off" when the renewable source is not available - read about what is happening in England, their wind sources dropped to (by memory) less than 2% output during cold weather from 9%, that is a huge problem - what about when the wind suddenly stopped in TX where there is a huge concentration of wind farms, the grid was within seconds of crashing, it is not possible to "spin up" generation quick enough to manage large power blocks that become unavailable, again unless certain people agree to be disconnected if you have a few hours to kill and are truly interested, these guys usually have reliable data http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epa_sum.html Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

we had a guy that did 57 AFF jumps, he graduated twice but would stay away more than 30 days and need a refresher jump, he would completely blow the jump and require more jumps, a surgeon with plenty of money and worked out - real strong guy after 30 or so jumps when he showed up he would manifest himself and the instructor, the instructor would ask what he wanted to work on for that jump, he would get a rig and suit up one jump would be perfect and the next would be crazy, spinning, pull at 8K for no reason, track on his back, etc. you never knew what was going to happen, I'm convinced that he was just scared to jump without an instructor Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

BV - you're a smart guy, you know that is comparing apples and oranges ethanol may be the costliest ongoing gov't screwup, even Al admitted he lied, everyone is paying for it thru lower gas mileage, increased food costs, and higher maintenance costs wind could grow 100% and it would be less than conventional generation shrinking 1% agree - dirty coal needs to go, scrub it, filter it and let the consumer pay the true cost, in the SE that cost is still lower than wind or solar none of the alternative technologies fix the problem of what happens when the source stops Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

I'm not anti-alternative energy but those that want to have and use it should be willing to pay the full cost. The problems I have are: 1) my money subsidizing the installation that is no way near cost effective (in the southeast); 2) the customer wanting me to buy any excess generation at full retail rates - a little info for those that don't know how this works, retail rates cover generation, transformation, transmission, distribution and metering, the only cost the alternative generator avoids is the generation 3) the customer not being willing to pay a stand-by fee - the fee covers the cost to provide all the infrastructure that is needed to provide power when his generator isn't working If a customer wants to install a generator that is OK. But if they don't want to pay for the grid then they should expect to be disconnected from the grid. Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

Utah is a good trip. Easy access to any of the slopes from the airport. You can stay near town at a Fairfield or other cheap hotel. Cheap tickets at Canyon Sports. A 5-day routine would be Park City, Canyons, Solitude, Alta and Deer Valley. Hit Main St in Park City for pizza and local beer. If going to Colorado, discount tickets available at REI or King Souper grocery stores in Denver. If going to Killington - that is the coldest I've ever been. All those are good but Whistler is the deal. That is one of my annual trips. Use Alluradirect.com to find lodging. If going before April, the pre-bought ticket package is the best deal. If going in April, stop at 7-11 in Squamish for discount tickets - good coffee too. Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

..the Survivor game says... Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

easiest way to screw up the drive thru is to place an order then leave the line Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

Al has already admitted that he did it for votes. Politics and reality are rarely the same. So when do we stop this ethanol disaster and stop subsidizing renewable energy where it is not cost effective. Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

Well, that's a good number to know. So, heat pumps are 2.5 times more efficient than baseboard? Is that air cycle or ground loop type? Maybe I'll have to install one in my rental house.

Maybe they thought you had an operational problem. Once they realized the batteries were absent they figured you were a big dummy. The spare set was a reminder to use batteries. Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

I don't agree with that. I routinely put my T-stat at 50 when I'm gone for more than a couple days. When I get back, I put it right to 64 (nomal daytime setting). I have an oil-burner, and when I go from 50 to 64 it will fire up, run for a while, the burner will shut down while the fan keeps going (normal). But before the fan shuts down, the burner usually kicks back on due to the walls, furniture and everything else being cold. It probably takes about 6-8 hours for everything to completely warm back up (getting into a bed with 2 blankets and a down comforter isn't a whole lot of fun, inuslation works both ways), but I burn considerable less fuel than I would if I left it up all the time I am gone. I've neglected to turn it down a couple times and the difference is pretty significant. Mr. Joe - if the guy had an oil burner I would suggest that he do exactly what you are doing. My comments were related to the operation of a HEAT PUMP not a furnace. Just in case there is any additional confusion. An OIL FURNACE and a HEAT PUMP are two completely different types of technology. :) As for the reheating of the structure. If you are gone 2-5 days the structure may not cool off to much, depends on the outdoor temp. These guys will be gone 3-4 weeks, the structure temp can change considerably. How much depends on the outdoor temp, inside temp, and surrounding apt units. Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

Probably no heat pump, just baseboard radiant. And I disagree with your basic tenet that the cost to reheat will exceed the savings. Direct baseboard heat is about 100% efficient, and any time spent not radiating excess heat out of the apartment will save some money. Reheating the environment will take less energy overall than keeping it heated, and losing energy to the outside, during the absence. Good idea to shut off the water heater, though. Dear John - stick to seperating flying metal :) You may be right about the heat source. If so, then how they turn it back on doesn't matter. I didn't say that the cost to reheat would exceed the (total) savings. If I had said that then you would be correct. What I said was it would equal "a weeks worth of savings", purely a guess. A typical heat pump (no such thing) can "make" 2.5 units of heat for each $1 of operating cost. Strip heat or baseboard heat makes 1 unit of heat for $1. So the heat pump is considerably more economical. Heat pumps merely move heat from one place to another. For most heat pumps and thermostats, if you raise the temp more than 2 degrees it will cause the heat strips to energize. Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

it depends on what kind of apt and where the pipes are located, stand alone, multi unit, first floor, second floor, etc. most of the electric bill is for water heating and space conditioning, turn off the water heater at the breaker panel, set the heat on 50 if this is multi unit the adjacent units will keep it warmer leave the fridge plugged in, it will cost $10-$15 to run it, not worth the hassle of empying and restocking unplug everything else, depending on the exact power company, most in that area charge about $7 flat fee and then 12 cents per kWh the real issue is what they do when they return, the apt probably has a heat pump, if they come in and move the T-stat to (let's say) 68 then the heat strips will come on and eliminate a weeks worth of savings this is a pain but they need to move the T-stat 1-2 degrees at a time, let the temperature catch up, then move it again until they get to the desired set point the walls, furniture, and everything else will take a couple days to reheat and the place will feel cold Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

Wow that sounds a lot like this other species I know... Except this other species doesn't have anyone to end their over-population. The idea that the deer would 'over-populate' is one that is caused by human over-population. And as we populate even more we're going to keep pushing the amount of 'allowed' animals down, because as we expand we'll take over their habitats (as we've done) and then where what was once their home will turn to farms, because as we populate we will need more sources of food. We're lucky there isn't anyone smarter or stronger than us, or we'd have been culled ages ago. If anything it is our ethical responsibility not to breed. And don't try say "It's the reason why we're here, our sole purpose is to breed... not doing so would be morally wrong"... Because every animal has the same reason to exist, to procreate, but somehow because we reproduce like destructive rabbits we can now dictate what is more worthy to live. I'm a misanthropist, it's no secret. But it's these facts that make me one. so you distrust and dislike mankind, interesting what are you doing to live your convictions? any solutions to the starvation, overpopulation and murder in your country? how do reconcile the fact that hunters pour tons of money into your country that supports the economy and funds the study and preservation of wildlife? I'm a Marine and Wildlife Biologist, it's no secret. Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

somehow I knew this thread would degenerate into an anti-hunting rant I hunt because I enjoy it, all aspects of it, the outdoors, practicing, fresh air, fellowship, tracking, stalking, hiding, observing wildlife and harvesting what was put on this earth for the sustainment of mankind in South Carolina one aspect of hunting is game management, we have a few thousand car-hit-deer accidents annually causing both financial loss and loss of human life, they destroy millions of dollars of farm crops - if it weren't for hunting we would have an epidemic of deer if deer are not controlled they overpopulate, transmit disease, suffer and die a terrible death, this has been proven a few times by the do-gooders, ohhh - don't kill the poor animals, read up on the problems at Fripp Island and Hilton Head in Argentina they have about 7 million doves and parakeets that eat and ruin the crops, hunters harvest about 15% annually, this seems to stabilize the population, my hunting party killed 10,783 in 3 days, they went to orphanages and to feed animal, hunters barely make a dent, without hunting within 2 years it would be almost impossible to grow anything to feed people the activities of man have created these problems, it is our ethical responsibility to manage the resource, to not do so would be inhumane so, no I don't feel guilty Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

none that bad but I did build a dock, deck and gazebo where a couple boards were cut wrong Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

in the recent November elections, in Walterboro SC, there were about 1,000 more votes cast than there are registered voters either the machines goofed up or there was some fraud going on Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

I have thin mints chilling in the freezer. lol - you too, always have some around Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

contact Professor Kellam she is a skydiver contact icevideot here, the husband Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

call the DZ 803-581-5867 there is a birthday party in Spartanburg so the DZ might be slow Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

Is that an accusation? can a moderator please do something about this. We actually do have a pilatus porter showing up this week, it is located only a minites away, but this type of accusation is uncalled for, and somewhat disgusting. you're kidding right, that is hilarious Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

Skydive Carolina, boogie and 30 year party, CASA and Otter either as crazy doctor, or swamp people Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.