toolbox

It's people! Soylent green is people! Call me what you will,but I liked Heston and his movies. Heston was a true champion of our rights. He marched with Martin Luther when it was controversal if not dangerous to do so. He played a character who had a relationship with a black women in the Omega Man. He was a good man. I agree that politicians are the masters of distraction, and deceit. As far as the over population issue,I'm not saying we should legislate against babies any more than we should legislate against gun ownership by law abiding citizens. I'm saying that the government should be using all the tools of their propaganda machine to help educate and deter people from over populating. Hey they could use the same tactics as the anti-gun liberals, except target over population instead.

Do gooders have no problem trying to take guns from the hands of regular citizens here in the US,yet the number of people who die from thirst,starvation,disease,and conflict associated with over population dwarfs the deaths from gun violence, and over poulation is getting worse by the day. So why target guns and ignore the real threat of over population? Even here in the US we have poverty that is the result of to many humans. Poverty breeds crime and violence. So why not campaign for population control instead of rewarding things like teen pregnancy with free housing,medical care,food,daycare,and education,gloryfication by the media of multiple births and huge families ,and leave the law abiding citizens 2nd amendment rights alone?

>So you are talking integration? I'm talking creating huge incentives to reduce the population growth if not reverse it instead of taking away individual rights, and encouraging the massive population that will most likely exist in the near future, to be hungry for rescources that have already been consumed. As the population increases the rescources become less abundant and violence will increase, even between countrymen, as competition for rescources leads to war,and history has shown this scenario to play out over and over.

The enemies of the 2nd amendment know they can't stop hard criminals from having guns,or using guns,especially in the big cities like LA or chicago. They know that they can't stop acts of terror using guns,bombs,cars,ect, with more laws. Even israel,with it's far stricter laws and more extensive security measures can't stop these acts of violence. This is not the real reason for the more restrictive laws that they are pushing. They want to use more restrictive legislation to control citizens from rural states and cities with lower population densities,or from states like texas where the patriotic attitudes and pride in being free are extreme. I bet the number of violent crimes is far lower in the less populated states since there are less people,but I bet the percentage of gun ownership is higher in these states as well. The violence is always greatest at the area with the most population density. If they really want to end violent crime maybe they should outlaw areas with high population densities,and maybe legislate against over population.

I am not religious. I believe in scientific method and try my best to be a realist. That being said,I find what this so called educator did repulsive. It is one thing to debate different philosophies,but to try and force another person to do anything against there religious beliefs, or to commit an act of disrespect toward their religious symbols goes against the bill of rights and freedom. I consider this to be tyrannical behavior on the part of the educator.

If you can't hop accross the room on the bad landing gear,or jump up and down on it a few times,then maybe you should wait longer.

Welcome to skydiving! Who did you make your tandems with?

I wonder how hard a small heavily loaded cross braced tandem canopy might spin with tension knots or other spinning mals? I bet it could get very interesting very fast.

Yes,you should worry about heavy turbulence. Many young jumpers will often use the "If I had more wing loading,I could better cut through turbulence" rational for downsizing. While it is true that heavier canopy loading will help cut through turbulence,it should not be the big determining factor in downsizing. You should not downsize until you have mastered all the performance of your present canopy and can fly it well in slow flight, and full flight, and land softly with accuracy downwind,no wind,or in perfect wind conditions. Remember that a more heavily loaded canopy can cut through turbulence better,but they can also collapse,and when a small heavily loaded canopy collapses it is a far worse scenario than a big lightly loaded canopy. If the turbulence is causing end cell collapse or severe drop outs,directional control issues,ect...,then wait until the conditions calm down before getting back in the air. Remember,it is better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air than it is to be in the air wishing you were on the ground.

If you have ever been in a brawl with a worthy opponent,you would know that there can be alot of spit,blood,snot,skin,broken nails ,occasional teeth,and hair flying around. I've even been bit twice myself. All this can happen in seconds. I seen a guy about 5'11" 215lb hit a guy with one punch in the morton washington dance hall parking lot during the loggers jubilee, and the guy almost died, and was never quite right after he came out of the coma with teeth missing. The punch was brutal,but landing on the trailer hitch with the back of his head most likely caused the most damage. Point is that there can be alot of DNA passed around in a fight.

Ten pound sledge hammer to the back of the head,and very reusable as well if you want cheap.

Now add the blood splatter and other DNA transfer that often happens in a scuffle,like skin under finger nails and hair,ect.

I never said DNA evidence is all that is needed for proof of guilt. There are many scources of evidence that can be used together with DNA. Audio,video,text messages,figerprints,shoe prints,tire prints,gps in electronic devices,witness,ect....,can be used as evidence. When all the evidence is conclusive,say for instance a law officer sees someone punch his partner in the side of the head with brass knuckles and kill them, and it is also caught on the dashcam,and seen by several pedestrians as well who also take cell phone video. That is alot of hard proof even without DNA that the person is guilty of murder.

Like I said Bill,I used to be against the death sentence,but just as DNA and all the other modern technology has proven innocence,it can also prove guilt above and beyond a reasonable doubt. Because of the use of these technologies I'm now for the death penalty. Housing,feeding,clothing,and health care for imprisoned murderers should be far more costly than killing them,and if not,there is something very wrong going on.

>If I did something like this...... If I shot a mother and her baby where I grew up, I would fear for my life ,not just from the community,but from my own family. I would expect that they would want to put me down like a mad dog.

>Cool that you trust the government 100% to have the power of life and death over you. No one with a lick of common sense would trust any government with 100% control over life and death,but thats why we have the second amendment. I used to be against the death penalty,but now with all the modern forensic technology(DNA testing,video evidence,ect) I think that proof beyond a reasonable doubt is a reality now. Once guilt is proven and the penalty is handed down the execution could and should cost no more than putting a sick dog or cat down at the local vets. Since the death sentence is reserved for the worst criminal acts like murder,I see no reason to give the convicted the best death money can buy, since they most likely gave little if any concern for the people they victimized.

>So he will refuse to confiscate guns from convicted murderers? The letter said that they(The sheriffs of Utah) would not recognize any executive order that went against the bill of rights and that they would not allow the confiscation of guns from law abiding citizens of Utah. Felons are not what many would consider as law abiding citizens,and murder is a top felony. So why do you ask if they would refuse to confiscate guns from someone who is a felon,and not allowed any guns in the first place? I wish all law enforcement felt the same as the Utah sheriffs feel about the oath to uphold and protect the US constitution.

Right! Gang bangers don't give a fuck about any laws,unless the laws help them. Gang bangers love drug laws for instance because the laws create profit for them from sales of illegal drugs. I bet the thugs love the idea of disarming all the law abiding citizens with more gun legislation as well.

>You underestimate the launch problem with that. Isn't a submarine a ship?Boomer subs can fire alot of missles can't they? If you can launch from a sub then why not a ship?

I bet if they sneaked one onto a ship,they could most likely fire it off the ship. It would not be impossible to get a ship within a few hundred miles of the US coast. I have to say as well,that I liked the original Red dawn and the remake. In both movies the city mayor(most likely a liberal) becomes a collaborator,and the gun enthusiast become the resistance. Wolverines!

> I read that as 'Did red dwarf' really piss off north korea? Where is Dr Who when you need him?

>B B B B B B B B Bad to the bone! I drink alone!all by myself

>Get a haircut and get a real job. George Thorogood and the destroyers. Yep,liked to party,and rocked out,but always respected my elders,strangers,animals,and property. We were still held accountable in those days as well.

I think that accountability has been replaced with lack of. More,and more people demand respect above and beyond what they have earned, or deserve. Less people give the basic respect to others that they demand for themselves. For instance,when I was a little kid in the mid 60's,if someone dropped the f-bomb in public(especially with women and children present),there would be a line of men waiting to get a piece of their ass.If the cops came and you pressed charges,then you might as well move out of town. People were polite,and gave the basic courtesy and respect to strangers and friends alike. Now I see not just teens,but people in there 30's and even 40's using pofanity everywhere,even around women and children,the elderly,ect. They do this because the law will protect them from getting ass whooped for being assholes. I also remember my parents being quite poor,and having nothing but ketchup sandwiches for dinner alot when I was around 5-6 years old,and we gladly ate horse meat. My parents were terrified at the thought of taking welfare, as were most people at that time,and it was almost unheard off. Only an occasional widowed mother would be on welfare,and then would still lower their heads in shame when you seen them in public. Now we are all treated like children by our government,and less people feel responsibility for anything they do, or do not do. So I blame the nanny state for most of the problems. But what do I know,I'm just some 50 year old guy who grew up in a logging community.

>Just leave PBR out of this. PBR,also known as wife beater in a can. Drank alot of that stuff while chasing down bean buritos,or ramen,when the winter was setting in,and the tandems were becoming few and far between,in the early years. PBR was a life saver Lets see now. I like cheap beer,I like corndogs,I like guns,I like fast and loud cars,I like monster trucks and tractor pulls. I'm pretty sure I possess most of the qualities of the average NASCAR fan