DougH

Unless vegetarians have their own garden and a greenhouse to grow year round they aren't as eco and animal friendly as they would like to think. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

Are you trying to tell me that there are incompetent managers on the federal payroll??? I thought all government workers were the creme de le creme that worked for less pay than the private sector because they were selfless individuals. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

You mean like the prosecutors that have to deal with some really heinous offenders... Or the personal injury lawyer you retained because a drunk hit your car, you are out of work, and the drunks insurance company is sandbagging you... Or the public defenders that work on a volunteer basis to defend our poor and mentally ill.... Or... "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

I think the milk example is a good one. Organic milk is way more expensive than regular milk. I don't see any advantages to organic milk over regular milk. I think there are huge advantages of raw milk (regular or organic) over pasturized regular or organic milk. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

I think eating non processed whole foods is the first key focus. I need to work on that first. I am envious of Amazon's response, pretty cool! I hope to be there some day when I don't spend so much time at work! "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

His mental history was unreported as far as the gun control databases go and not on record. Was this a failure of gun control, or the medical profession and mental health establishment? Same as Hassan. There was already a system in place that should have stopped Hassan before the Fort Hood shooting. The best designed systems fail. I am not proposing a solution... I am proposing a question to you Professor. I think the gunfree policy of VT resulted in a defenseless victim zone that did not improve students saftey in this circumstance. Do you think having legally armed students among the victems could have resulted in a better outcome? How do you keep a determined armed gunman out of any open setting that can't be locked down with metal detectors at all points of entry? "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

How do you propose 100% stop armed gunman from entering an open college campus? Rules banning something from a college campus do not actually stop the entry of the banned items from campus? ? Maybe we should post you at the gate. You are clearly a macho guy and with your gun you can stop anything. I bet you even give advice to Chuck Norris? Would you like to anwser my question instead of making the conversation personal? How do you stop weapons from getting on to an open college campus? We could put me or Chuck Norris at the front gate, but that ignores the fact that most colleges don't have gates, they are open communities. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

How do you propose 100% stop armed gunman from entering an open college campus? Rules banning something from a college campus do not actually stop the entry of the banned items from campus? There was already a rule that banned firearms from the VT campus. Are you suprised that this rule didn't stop Cho from taking guns on campus where they were not allowed? Do you agree that a determined Cho could have obtained guns even if he was denied legal purchase of them? Please tell me how you stop some one from Cho from ever getting their hands on a gun? In my mind as long as there is private ownership of guns in this country a determined individual can allways obtain them. Which brings me back to my original direction of questioning... Fact: Cho shouldn't have been allowed to purchase a weapon under current state law, but failures in medical reporting contributed to the break down of the existing gun control system. Fact: There were rules at VT which banned the possesion of weapons on campus. Fact: All of Cho's victims were unarmed. Fact: The police arived only after Cho shot himself, and died from the self inflicted wounds. Opinion: Cho had over 200 extra rounds on him and could have killed many more students if he hadn't killed himself. The police response was not fast enough to protect the students killed. You can wish, as I do, that Cho wasn't allowed to own a gun, and didn't have the ability to get on campus with weapons... that is what I wish happened but it isn't what happened. This is the question: Do you think legally armed students could have reduced the number of lives lost? "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

Both interesting posts. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

You have, on countless times. . Really? Link, please. you're perfectly capable of searching yourself. And since you wrote them, it's not even necessary to search. TRANSLATION, you are talking through your ass and know you can't find one. I don't care what you have posted in the past about gun ownership. Could you please anwser my question about gun free zones, such as the ones we have on many college campuses? I wouldn't expect you to be evading my question Professor, especially after calling Strawman on my earlier post. If you don't like being called on your strawman, don't post one. If you don't care what I post about gun ownership, why do you respond to my posts? If you want to be evasive and fall back on declaring a question or path of discussion irrelevant, "STRAWMAN STRAWMAN", be my guest. It really isn't adding to the conversation, and it doesn't reflect well on your ability to have a constructive two-sided conversation. I responded to your post because you referenced Cho and his ability to get weapons. I agree 100%, I wish he wasn't able to get weapons either. But he was, and the break down of the gun control laws already on the books at the time was mostly related to failures of the mental health system and the university, not the gun control laws themselves. Even if Cho was denied the purchase by the gunstore and the existing gunlaws he could have made a straw purchase, or he could have gotten the guns from a relative (the Columbine shooters couldn't legally own guns and that didn't stop them). I can not think of a combination of gun control laws that would guarantee that unstable individuals who are determined to committ mass murder are unable to use guns to do so, short of banning all private ownership of guns and removing all guns from society. So getting back to my question, which I don't know why you are so reluctant to anwser... Could you please anwser my question about gun free zones, such as the ones we have on many college campuses? That was my question, are you going to anwser it? If a gunman entered one of your lecture halls would you rather have a lecture hall full of unarmed students, or would you rather have some legal concealed carry permit holders in the class? "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

I don't disagree with that. The 8 hour CCW class I took with live fire was not a infringement on my rights, and was very valuable in my opinion. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

You have, on countless times. . Really? Link, please. you're perfectly capable of searching yourself. And since you wrote them, it's not even necessary to search. TRANSLATION, you are talking through your ass and know you can't find one. I don't care what you have posted in the past about gun ownership. Could you please anwser my question about gun free zones, such as the ones we have on many college campuses? I wouldn't expect you to be evading my question Professor, especially after calling Strawman on my earlier post. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

You have, on countless times. . Really? Link, please. While he is looking for the posts would you care to comment about gun free zones like the VA Tech college campus? "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

No it isn't a strawman argument. I did not claim that anyone here was suggesting keeping stable law abiding citizens from getting guns. What I am saying is that despite our best efforts sometimes the wrong people will get their hands on guns and will try to get their 5 minutes of fame. Any system you come up with to keep the guns out of the wrong hands will fail on occasion, and will somtimes fail with disasterous results. Cho shouldn't have been able to purchase his two weapons under current laws, but the system broke down. Would you agree that as long as there is any private ownership of guns in this country that that systems can break down and people like Cho can get there hands on guns? And while you took the time to call strawman on me, you didn't anwser my other question about gun free zones. You brought up Cho and VA Tech, which brings up the whole question about gun free zones. Do you think the VA Tech shootings could have played out differently there were legally armed students among those attacked? "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

So far I have only purchased second hand containers. I love my Icons but I would give a hard look at a container that had a reserve main combo available that really upsized the reserve. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

I don't disagree. I am going to look into the new PD reserves this summer to try to get some more fabric in the container. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

The smaller size of the reserve, 110. There have been fatalities in the past for landings under fully deployed reserves with stowed brakes that are larger than mine. I think the AAD is more likely to save me if I have a complete brain fart and I am doing something other than getting a canopy above my head. But I try not to take the mindset that it is going to save me if I get knocked out. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

Define nutter, nutcase, and loonie. Cho is a good example. Why would YOU have wanted him to be able to buy a gun with no difficulty? Unless you remove all guns from society completely you will allways have some people gain access to weapons who really shouldn't have access at all. It is unavoidable, and all the gun laws in the world won't change this unless you get rid of all of the guns. So since you have to acknowledge that guns will get into the wrong hands, why restrict them from people who are stable law abiding citizens? You reference the VA tech masacre. Why would you want all of Cho's victems to be legally barred from carrying weapons on campus? If there were several armed students do you think that may have changed the events of that day? Gun free zones are only safe until some one like Cho shows up, then they are victim zones, without enough security and police to protect everyone. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

How many people have to die before Bloomberg closes the knife show loophole. http://www.aolnews.com/2011/02/12/new-york-city-cops-arrest-maksim-gelman-in-deadly-rampage/ "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

BOA didn't pay taxes in 2009 because they had a net operating loss. Please explain why a corporation should pay income tax when they have no taxable income? The tax benefit is the result of carrying the loss back to offset taxable income in a prior year, the tax code allows that for both sole proprietors and corporations. Evil corporations evil evil! They aren't taking a deduction on the principal payments on the government bail out debt, they are only taking a deduction on the interest. Individuals do the same with their qualified mortgage interest, and interest on loans that their business may take out. Evil corporations evil evil! These articles have a ton of spin, and they are written to try to outrage people that have little knowledge of how the tax code works! "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

I am likely to die any way. My reserve isn't going to do a lot without a flare! "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

Is not. Oh great follower of the opinions. . . . . Anwser the question... straw man straw man. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

I guess it depends what "more" you are looking for. When I have a conversation or a debate I want to have a productive conversation, with constructive back and forth. I might actual hear a view point that I didn't consider. If instead I wanted to attack people with my ideas like a 2x4 I wouldn't have a real useful exchange on ideas would I. The back and forth I see from some people is really asinine. It looks like a bunch of siblings arguing... did not... did tooo... did not... "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P

Yes.

Write your representatives. Tax planning is within the law, the laws written by the people that you voted for. Tax avoidance is another story, but that isn't what GE is doing. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P