tkhayes

yes, and late at night, if you were on a cell phone, got out of your truck, approaching me and were 'scary-looking', I might take the opportunity to 'defend myself' by shooting your ass..... Apparently you think that is a reasonable response.... Zimmerman is getting his trial. As he should. Anything else prior to the verdict is pretty much unnecessary.

In a thick Eastern European Accent, say something like "This morning, I janitor. Today, Tandem Instructor! What a great country America is!!"

Skydive City/Z-Hills www.skydivecity.com

And I ran a weekend Cessna dropzone for years. The most I ever managed jumping hard every day was 350 in a year. If the club did 100 tandems in a year, that was considered good. In total, the club did 4000 jumps each year. It was even difficult for the AFF and IAD instructors/coaches to get the minimums to stay current by the rules we had then. To impose 1000 jump 'whatevers' on dropzones such as these would be the end of them. We did just fine. We had malfunctions, we had issues, we had injuries and no one got killed. In fact we turned out a lot of good skydivers and a lot of fun. The argument to raise jump requirements based on a single fatality, whatever those requirements might be, is flawed.

Any instability after a cutaway is caused by the jumper kicking and wiggling. So stop kicking and wiggling. Regardless of what spin you might be in, the very instant you cutaway, any body is thrown in a straight line. Enjoy the straight line and let the reserve pilot chute do its thing. You are willing to allow you reserve to be fired using an AAD if you are unconscious and possibly tumbling/spinning right?

I never said any such thing. Try reading it again. Nice try though.

again, answered two posts ago

I gave a plausible scenario just one or two posts ago.

And perhaps the kids' Dad had coached him on how to look out for 'creeps' that follow you around. JHC, that's Boy Scouts 101. And perhaps the kid knew he was being followed and then was retreating, and perhaps then Zimmerman continued to follow him, and perhaps the kid took steps to defend himself from someone that as far as he knew, was a kidnapper, child molester, whatever. Only now you are saying that he attacked Zimmerman. Zimmerman participated in an escalation of a situation that did not need to be escalated. And he did it while armed. There was no need for either a neighborhood watch person to be armed and no need to continue following. Is it a crime? Apparently not. Again, I state that most of American seems to think it is OK to shoot someone for fuck all reason. And that is sad.

Or perhaps The mob demanding justice at this point is an accurate reflection of what society is willing to tolerate. democracy at work. Perhaps if nothing happens to Zimmerman, some good comes out of it in the form of changes to the laws as to what is acceptable behavior when carrying a firearm. The stand your ground laws have already defined it, perhaps it needs to be clarified.

http://news.yahoo.com/pa-abuse-trial-window-church-practices-161036032.html Yes it's about time. Shameful and disgraceful. 28 years in prison is not enough for 'conspiracy'. When are people going to wake up and face the music that the Catholic church is a criminal organization? Denial for decades. The authorities have been investigating child abuse in the church in Newfoundland since the 70's. Even now, all over the world, the 'denials' still come out when new cases are uncovered (and then apparently covered up). In Newfoundland, no one (the law) had the balls to even go after the church. They turned the complaints back over to the RCC to deal with. It took many more years for it to be taken seriously. Even with those cases in the 80's, the RCC denied everything else and buried it all over the world and is still actively doing so today. It's about time for this too: http://ffrf.org/news/releases/nyt-ad/ and the actual ad (which i think was tremendous) and yet had nothing to do with child abuse: http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/03/09/ffrf-tells-catholics-its-time-to-leave-the-church/ Wake up Catholics, your church is a haven for child molesters - you've been duped.

+1

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1185672#1185672 I had this debate 8 years ago - with many in SC. Is it still true today that if you participate in an escalating dispute and then shoot someone, then you are guilty of a crime? Sounds like Zimmerman may be in that position, given he initiated the 'pursuit' after being asked not to by 911 operators. I am also equally sure that many Americans are perfectly Ok with shooting someone for fuck all reason - just because they feel threatened. I am saddened by the whole incident and it demonstrates a flaw in the 'stand your ground' laws. Also demonstrates a serious flaw in the American psyche.

http://costofwar.com/en/ shaddup already......

who said that it was OK?

Looks to me like a RECOUNT gave him the victory. I did not know that 'felons' could 'give' anyone a victory....but a nice headline for Faux News. I have no issue with any and all Citizens being able to vote, even convicted felons on death row. Look at all the trouble it would rid the process of....

Stuff like this may do more to end the war(s) that any level of political wrangling. Reason number 351 to end the wars and bring everyone home......everyone. Shut it the fuck down.

I made no such claim, I gave one of many examples. So far, healthcare is not written into the constitution and therefore does not have the same 'rights' for all citizens. It is a policy, still under debate, not a right - unrelated. (shakes head and walks away cause he has better things to do than argue with people that cannot understand a constitutional right)

once again, you digress into an unrelated topic.....

I'm fine with all that you say - but the title of the thread is "Would you support a wingloading BSR?" and that, by itself, absolutely not is still the answer. If you want to develop a course, then develop a course, but let's not slap wingloading into it as the fix, if it is *NOT* actually the fix.

absolutely not. How about a demonstration of specific skills? Pilots have to demonstrate skills under the auspice of a checkride, then they pass or fail. But no one says you cannot do your private pilot rating in a high performance airplane, as long as the examiner can go along. We have know for years that wing-loading is simply 'one' of the many factors in canopy choices, or has everyone missed every canopy seminar that has ever been written?

Well the second amendment uses "shall not be infringed" and the all the voting amendments uses "Shall not be denied or abridged..." So the language is similar, however not identical. Go make your case for no IDs for guns and I will make my case for no silly ID requirements for voting. But they are separate arguments, and making some old lady going 50 miles to get a special form of ID that she may never have had in her life because the 'State' changed the rules, sounds like 'abridged' And if you think that the States have never done anything to 'subdue voters' in the past, well.... if that were the case, we never would have needed the 15th, 19th, or 26th amendments.

Maybe 'some influence' yes, but the Republicans are arguing over birth control, not gas prices. And they are arguing about abortion and other women's rights. That is the naive fantasy world I was referring to. As long as the republicans continue to argue about stuff like that and continue on that as a campaign platform, the Democrats will have a 'cake-walk' as you put it. I expect the economy will look much better by election time, people are somewhat naive, they will see the improvements (except for the extreme right of course) and Obama will most likely win a second term, maybe even a majority, as the Reps are doing nothing but self-annihilation.

Maybe they opened the account in 1947 and still have it, long before any ID's were necessary. Maybe the banks in that area don't follow that federal guideline, even though they should (i.e. "I've known Mrs Smith for 35 years, she used to babysit me") maybe your oversimplification of the processes are just that, oversimplification. Maybe just maybe, someone actually will have difficulty getting the ID to vote, given that the govt is not asking for 'ID', they are asking for a very specific list of only certain types of IDs and therefore that would be an undue burden for many (or even some) and maybe the right to vote is no longer a 'right' And maybe if you believe in parts of the Constitution, but not other parts of it, maybe just maybe you are at the very least, paradoxical.

I did actually - Yes, I do read what I write. Answered. Gun rights have nothing to do with voting rights. I already stated that I gave up on the gun issues. I have no issues with gun rights. I have always stated that the USA has a gun problem. No where have I ever advocated of fought for any restirction to owning guns. I have stated that the USA has a gun problem. But given now that your tactic would seem to be digressing from the real issue to go on a tangent to attempt to discredit the poster instead of adddressing the thread, which was, and I will remind you - voting rights- well.... I would expect nothing less.