Lucky...

And the next question would be that of how much seperation.

I do think the visibility loss of a 270 is greater than of a 180. Furthermore, the commitment going in is greater as there are often fewer outs and more planning is required the more degrees you turn. If there was a storm of auto accidents ofpeople driving 90-1000mph I would do teh same and regard them as poor drivers, not speed being the primary factors, and I would think I'm right whether I am or not. I guess the issue here is that: A) Hook turns are unneccessary but cool and fun B) You assume others want to take the same chances, so it doesn't just include the hook turner

Gracias Senior. You two get a room..... assuming you are both over 18 that is

For all of the "shortcomings" that you find offensive about this great country, I challenge you to find any country in the world, not just Europe, that doesn't have a sordid past and mulitiple existing problems, that, if you lived there, you wouldn't be bitching about. Who cares about sordid past, I'm about the presen and future. Countries with far less $$$ than us provide medical care for their citizens over tax breaks for the rich. The history of teh US only shatters the founding father bullshit I'm subjected to all teh time. It was crap then, but who cares when the present is here and 1 of 6 Americans has no medical insurance while YOUR president wants to make it even more exclusive and passed measures to revoke OT pay and make it harder for citizens to BK medical bills..... not to mention your Congress refused to pass the min wage incr, so states were forced to do what your criminals wouldn't. As for other countries, if you have a point to make with data, I'd love to read it.

I hate restrictions too, so if I had my druthers, I'd rather have a 90mph speed limit, as that's how I drive anyway. But rules have to be made for the least capable of our society, so they drag it down to 75,65, etc... Should DZ's be the same way? Slow fliers are getting nailed by swoopers, usually 270ers, so should we eliminate them or segregate them as with faster auto traffic move left? I can see both sides, so I'm just throwing this out there. I see a couple banners joined in the masses of no-banners. I wonder what a broad USPA vote of the 33k members would say? I wonder if teh USPA is mulling this issue over?

S&T? Swooping and canopy control? There are actual skydiving forums on this site you know. No shit?!!! Imagine that. Hey, I innocently posted it here, just asking a question and I get angry folks, not feelin any love here . I know it's a sensitive issue.

Where does it belong? As for outright banning, not that I'm advocating it, but in light of the recent barrage of deaths something has to be addressed. BTW, I'm not agry and emotional on this, just looking for opinions. I realize it is a sensitive subject tho.

It's not my rule, and I'm not sure what you mean by curing line twists; is that to say that line twists while doing a 180 could still occurr or are you saying line twists at opening? I'm not advocating either side of this issue, just wondered what the populous would say.

Simple question, should the USPA outlaw 270's at USPA DZ's?

I don't support that, I just support them having rights, due process, as I wrote and others denied them having. Don't you know what a fascist, semi-totalitarian POS the US gov is? If we just let sme guys with vid cams send guys to prison for life we would have >1/2 our citizens in jail as indentured servants producing goods and services as slaves. Do you think that 99.99999999% of all prisoners are guilty with a puny erro/corruption factor? There are 10's of 1,000's of innocents in jail/prison, probably a 100,000 or more. Political prisoners, prisoners of convenience, prisoners of wrong place/time. You're right, we should have 15-minute summary trials in front of lower court judges (non-lawyers) and sentence them at the same time. Hasn't your party's recent lies and unillingness to testify under oath taught you that all kinds of shit occurrs when liars are allowed to run free? At the point where I watch the trial and evidence and understadn the rulings by teh judge. Judges can refuse to admit critical evidence taht would have rendered a differnet ruling. Judges can refuse a defendant's defense and make them choose a more pallatable one that is of teh liking of teh court, rendering exonertaing evidecnce unheard. Learn a bit about the system and become nausiated. I do, but as I wrote, he may have consented to that as part of a plea deal. With all that said, I think the show is doing great theings, why aren't the cops doing this on their own?

Perhaps teh police aren't for public safety as advertised. Entrapment is a thing of the past for teh most part. You have to go to a nunnery and talk a nun into prostituting before you can claim entrapment. If it's something you would do anyway, the police can lie to you; it's Constitutionally upheld that way. Police are liars.....Duh. Ends justifies the means? If we kill all Arabs and we have no more terrorism, is it a bad thing to kill all Arabs? I don;t think these stings are entrapment, but I don't like ends/means ars either. I can look up cases later, but you wrote it: if it's something you would do anyway. Have entrapment args worked for these creeps? I don't think so.

OK, on a narrow scope it "deters" online predators, but I doubt it changes pedophilia one bit. With that, I'm all for what they're doing with the show. In justice classes they demonstrate how deterrence is meaningless and that it doesn't change crime a bit, just as gun revocation doesn't deter crime in Europe/Australia, it just lessens gun crimes. Same with internet pedos, the show may slow some internet pedo crimes, but not effect pedophilia in general. Just as when they go bust up the red light districts, the whores go elsewhere. They police base jumping at national parks, base jumpers go elsewhere. Get what I'm saying? I don't think inactive pedos count, so pedos are numbered by those committing acts, so I don't see that point as meningful. I see you trying to say that the show just cuts down on internet pedos, but not on pedophilia as a whole, then trying to backdoor the notion that the show does deter pedophilia in general. It would be nice, but let's be real, these fuckers don't care about punishment/death when it comes to their acts. And before teh GD internet we had no pedophilia, rt? Pedos have been alive and well in teh Catholic church for decades if not centuries. Hell, the Greek/Roman theatre didn't use women but little boys as women, so there was plenty of that shit then too. I think the internet has had little impact on pedophilia, just made it more visible and convenient. Now that I can agree with. Agreed. I wish they'd stop being the ticket-writing, revenue producing pricks that they are and do more stings like this. Then we could appreciate them. Agreed. I wonder if these creeps agree to let the media air these as part of a sweetheart plea deal. And then sign a gag to that fact.

Well, you can get rid of hairy armpits in five minutes... What are ya saying; fat chicks never go away?

A) Deterrence is an "unproven" side effect of punishment. B) The show has probably cut down on the # of internet predators, but they have just chosen another method; the number of pedos has probably not changed because of the show.

That was my point! Fucking douchebags gave up their 'Rights' when the took them away from innocent children! As much as pedos are the scum of teh earth, they still have basic const rights and should have them. If they don't then the ones accused by their estranged wives who want total control and falsely make these claims would be rewarded while innocent people go to jail for life. I'd rather let 9 guilty go as well as the 10th innocent than to go the other way. Sorry, I'm for the rights of the innocent,. the way the US Const was written.

Isn't that going to get this once again bounced back to the bonfire? This is SC. We should "discuss politics, guns, religion and any other topic you feel the need to address from your soap box." Hey, you brought in your shaved/unshaved areas, not us

Actually I don't, what's the ref?

OK, I challenge you to post pics of all of your hairy areas and let us judge them. Actually I thought it was a thread about a guy not missing America for all its shortcommings. I posted several and no one has yet to challenge them..... Hmmmm....

well... when she's on top, you don't have to stand. There's such a thing as overdisclosure here, Kay. Overdisclosure? Just a joke.

well... when she's on top, you don't have to stand. There's such a thing as overdisclosure here, Kay.

Bahahahaa. There's a name for a woman with a hairy back...... A MAN. Perhaps some of the hairy woman lovers should read this: http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Palace/2009/Funky.html

If ya wanna call me a pedo for liking my chicks w/o hair then that's cool. I wonder if you are into mustaches and ear hair?

Darn! Now you're telling us! And to think I picked my woman after a careful armpit hair count... Women should shave their armpits and 1 other area that I can think of ........

I don't think that was his 3rd option; I'm thinking it had to do with a derogatory liberal or European reference. - Overweight, hairy armpits: Condition that can be easily changed. - feminazi: Attitude that can be changed - ugly: A state, not easily changed So these are all very different attributes. True, but a person's apparance often refelcts what is going on inside the mind, with the exception of my bald ass, as I keep concentrating to push out more hair and it doesn't work Fat chicks often have an emotional anomoly, such as a rape that occured when they were young or just simple lack of self-control. I don't criticize people for what they cannot control, just for things they can and don't....

Really, what's worse: hairy armpits or fat chicks? A third option comes to mind. Which is????????????