Hooknswoop

Why was she unable to pull the cutaway handle? Derek V

Guys tend to convince themselves they are not afraid of anything. They are able to maintain this charade, right up until it is time to actually exit the aircraft. Then the fear overwhelms them. How do you prevent this? Simple, but not easy; admit, to yourself, that you are afraid. Then manage that fear. It is OK (and natural) to be afraid of jumping out of an airplane. You want to do well, you don't want to get hurt, or dead. You know that your performance will be evaluated back on the ground. And as much as Instructors try and tell students it isn't pass or fail, it is. You either pass to the next level or you do not. Admit you will be afraid at exit, pull time, deployment and landing. Being prepared to handle these events before they happen will allow you to perform. Women tend to admit the are afraid or nervous and are therefore prepared to handle these events. Derek V

Wrong. Wrong. You clearly do not understand what a new-sew finger trap is. Derek V

I don't. I don't support a universal background check law because it does not prevent felons from acquiring firearms. This is because the law is unenforceable. Derek V

They didn't make it better. By "they", I mean the mandatory, universal, background checks and magazine capacity limit laws. Bill, you thought these laws could be enforce as well. Now they have been enacted and proven to be unenforceable. What is your opinion now? I'm all for making things better. These laws did not do that. These restrictions limit personal freedom. For what gain(s)? Derek V

The point of this thread is that some people said these laws would be enforceable. They are not. The point is that anti gun people simply want to restrict gun rights and don't care if the laws work or. Or. Derek V

Waiting for me to post them?!?!?! Colorado citizens' freedoms were limited for what? Feel good anti gun laws that don't actually improve safety? This is why I do not support more anti gun laws. They do not accomplish anything. Funny I do not see the anti gun supporters I this thread supporting the Colorado gun laws. I said the laws were not enforceable. Colorado Sheriffs say they are unenforceable. Where are the people that were saying they could be enforced now? Detek V

So can anyone explain to me why these 2 new guns laws were a good idea? Derek V

It is news because some people thought these laws were enforceable. They have been proven wrong. Derek V

Wow, anything to avoid admitting the laws are unenforceable! The article is fro yesterday, the picture in the article was from 2013. Derek V

Because he gave that speech in 2013. I seem to recall you thought the new Colorado gun laws were enforceable...... Derek V

The new gun laws are unenforceable. Derek V

Like I kept saying, the 2 new gun laws in Comorado are unenforceable. Appeals court says Colorado sheriffs can't sue governor over gun laws By John Ingold, The Denver Post 22 Mar 2016, 05:42 PM FILE -- Larimer County Sheriff Justin Smith speaks to a crowd. Sheriffs from around the state gathered to speak out against gun control before President Barack Obama was set to give a speech at the Denver Police Academy about a mile away. A group of Colorado sheriffs who contend that two controversial state gun laws are unconstitutional vowed Tuesday to file a new lawsuit after a federal appeals court rejected their first one. In a 33-page ruling on the laws and lawsuits that emerged after mass shootings in Aurora and Connecticut, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the sheriffs and other plaintiffs didn't show they were sufficiently harmed by the new gun restrictions to bring a suit. The ruling means that two laws passed in 2013 — one that expanded background checks on firearms purchases and another that limited the capacity of ammunition magazines — remain in effect. "I'm proud of the team in my office that fulfilled our legal role of defending state laws," Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman said in a statement. This is the second loss for the lawsuit, which was filed in 2013 and names Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper as the sole defendant. But, paradoxically, both supporters and opponents of the new laws cheered Tuesday's ruling as a victory for their sides. The reason for that optimism has to do with the lawsuit's convoluted legal path. After a nine-day trial in 2014, a federal district court judge in Denver ruled against the lawsuit and upheld the contested laws as constitutional. The sheriffs and the other groups involved in the suit appealed and asked the 10th Circuit, which is one rung in authority below the U.S. Supreme Court, to reverse the trial judge's ruling. The ruling Tuesday did toss out the trial judge's analysis, but that was because the 10th Circuit judges concluded the lawsuit never should have made it all the way to trial. The appeals court judges did not decide whether the laws are constitutional. Instead, the 10th Circuit judges ruled that all the plaintiffs — who include sheriffs of 54 of the state's 64 counties, plus numerous nonprofit organizations and businesses — hadn't shown they were harmed enough by the laws to have the authority to sue over them. In legal terms, the 10th Circuit ruled the plaintiffs didn't have "standing." The plaintiffs argued the laws violated the Second Amendment, which protects gun rights, and the Americans with Disabilities Act. In one part of their argument, for instance, some of the plaintiffs said the laws created a fear that they might be prosecuted for doing things like loaning a gun to someone during a target shooting charity event. But the 10th Circuit said that kind of speculative fear isn't enough to bring a lawsuit. "Such 'some day' speculations are insufficient to establish an injury-in-fact for purposes of ... standing," 10th Circuit judge Nancy Moritz wrote on behalf of the three-judge panel. At an afternoon news conference, lawsuit backers cast the ruling as an opportunity to try again. David Kopel, an attorney who works for the Independence Institute and who represented the sheriffs in the lawsuit, said he is happy the 10th Circuit voided the lower court's finding, even if it still resulted in his lawsuit being dismissed. Kopel said the 10th Circuit ruling now provides a "road map" for the sheriffs and other plaintiffs to file a new suit alleging new harms. He declined to say what those new complaints might be or how plaintiffs might solve the standing issue. "That's an intricate matter of law," he said. But Kopel also said no one has yet been prosecuted under the laws. "The laws are unenforceable, and they haven't been enforced," he said. Eileen McCarron of Colorado Ceasefire, an organization that supports the laws, said the 10th Circuit's ruling was a significant blow to the laws' opponents. "They've got to go re-figure out their case," she said. "They're back at square one, and our laws still stand." John Ingold: 303-954-1068, jingold@denverpost.com or @johningold

Can't catch everything. Or could have been the auto pilot. Caused by Right, the instruments were displaying contradictory and/or confusing information because of water in the static air system. Unless you are in a Or a malfunctioning auto pilot. Derek V

OK, thank you for explaining it to me. Derek V

Don't you need the phone password to get into the phone to change the iCloud password? Derek V

We've known that the San Bernardino changed the password at the request of the FBI for a while now. I am still confused why they cannot access everything if they could change the password? They needed the old password and have the new password, since they changed it. Why do they need Apple to break into the phone? Derek V

I get it, they do not have the password. They should ask the person that changed it what the new password is. Simple. Derek V

Right, I got all that. Right. Isn't the phone evidence? Shouldn't there be a chain of evidence? Shouldn't the FBI know exactly who had the phone and when? Why can't the FBI ask the person who changed the password (as well as why) what the new password is? Then they can get the data using the iCloud back up process Apple described. If they cannot find the person who changed the password, then the chain of evidence is compromised and that person could have done anything with the phone prior to changing the password. Derek V

I'm just thinking out loud, but why not find out who changed the password and use the new password to get the data via the iCloaud backup? Derek V

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/07/opinions/taya-kyle-gun-control/index.html Great Read. Derek V

Not many, but I know where to find 3 sets of the RW-6, large, separable 3-rings Derek V

I have not experienced this. Derek V

I replace my spectra kill line with vectran day 1. I use vectran for my kill line the same reason we use it for canopy lines. I don't ever have to worry about it shrinking and my PC not fully inflating. Derek V

According to FAR Part 65.127; (a) A smooth top table at least three feet wide by 40 feet long. Derek V