wolfriverjoe

Would you jump a 150 right now? If not, why not? If not, then why would you jump a reserve that size? 7 cells aren't that much different or "more docile". The "attitude at your DZ" is pretty foolhardy. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Right. Sure it is. And there is a lot more to the NT than we know. Generally accepted is that there was a "book" for each disciple. But the early church decided that it was too complicated, so chopped it to 4 (there were 4 compass headings and "4 elements"). You are certainly entitled to your beliefs, but to claim the Bible as historical fact is ridiculous. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

It's not called "infanticide" because it isn't. Pure and simple. A fetus is not an infant. Nor is an embryo. Those three stages of human development each have separate definitions. Neither the embryo nor the fetus is "self contained", they are fully dependent on the host (mother) for survival. Who is being purposefully naive? "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Yeah. Billy Graham's son. From the link: Rational and reasonable right there. Apparently he never got the word that the videos were not accurate. He supports Trump's position of banning Muslims too. Growing anger, shrinking intelligence. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Clicky fixie

You're being rational, reasonable and objective. Stop it. That is not appropriate behavior here. Some people simply refuse to believe anything that goes against what they believe. The so-called debate between Bill Nye & Ken Ham was a good example of this. When asked what would change their minds, Nye said "evidence." Ham said "nothing." I was taught healthy skepticism and critical thinking. That means I look at a story with an open mind, and compare and contrast different versions of that story (including ones that say "that simply isn't true"), and consider the source and their biases and motives. But unfortunately, there's a lot of stupid people out there. People who seem to think that something is true simply because they want it to be. The fundamentalist Christian denial of evolution is a good example of this. The scariest part is that some of those people are leaders and policy makers. The link above quotes a US Congress critter. Almost as scary is that those people vote. This sums it up well: "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

That's it. Life is risk. To go through life simply avoiding or minimizing all risk is to not really live. Learning risk management, respecting the dangers that are present everywhere, understanding that nothing is guaranteed, all that, allows one to actually live their life. You get it. The ones telling you that you should quit don't. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Hi Jerry, Nobody knows exactly how many there are. It's not something that stats are kept on. At least not "how many were stopped by someone with a gun" vs "how many ended when the cops showed up" or "how many were stopped when the shooter killed himself." As far as other "defensive gun uses" (DGUs), there are (again) no accurate stats. In part, as was pointed out above, because many of them don't get reported. As in, someone is at a gas station, is approached by someone (or a group) and when threatened, the citizen pulls out a gun and scares the assailant(s) off. Not wanting a hassle, the citizen puts his gun away, finishes fueling and drives off. There have been a variety of estimates of these sorts of things. Numbers run the gamut from "tens of thousands" per year up into the millions. The NRA magazine publishes a page of DGUs every month, in a column called "The Armed Citizen." Short, one paragraph or so, articles taken from newspapers across the country. Usually a dozen or so per month. And I wouldn't blame Meli a bit for needing to change his pants. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Generally taking cover or running away. Wishing that they hadn't been forced to leave their gun locked in their car. How many of the recent shootings took place in a location that was "posted prohibited"? Or, when an armed individual does stop an attacker before the body count gets very high, it doesn't make the news. After Sandy Hook, Mother Jones claimed that "Armed Civilians Never Stopped a Mass Shooting." The Weekly Standard looked into it and found a number of cases where shootings were stopped before they reached the criteria to be considered a "mass shooting." http://www.weeklystandard.com/is-it-true-armed-civilians-have-never-stopped-a-mass-shooting/article/690808 "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

I can't find the quote online anywhere, but a week or so ago there was a Chicago city council member who said that she has believed for a long time that the cops can kill anyone they want with impunity. Even if it's cold blooded murder, the rest of the police will cover it up. (This was on WBBM news radio). It's not just murder they cover up, either. An off duty cop beat the shit out of a female bartender a couple years ago. The rest of the department covered it up. http://abcnews.go.com/US/chicago-police-found-guilty-covering-bartender-beating/story?id=17716840 And cops covering up the misdeeds of other cops isn't confined to Chicago. Two cops in Cincinnati covered up an off duty Sergeant's drunk driving accident. And got caught. http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2015/12/17/officer-pleads-crash-led-cover-up-charges/77477182/ "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Dekker is correct - if someone is "INVOLVED" in an accident, most states have a minimum damage amount that requires you report it, or even wait and get an accident report written up. The numbers for my state are like $1500 or $2500 or so, I don't recall the exact amount. But that's pretty much repair cost for almost any visible damage nowadays. ^This. It would be considered "leaving the scene of an accident." UNLESS... The driver of the mini van said something like: "Wow, that's really nice of you. I'm sorry I hit you, but I'm really happy I didn't damage your car and that you are so understanding. Have a nice day." In which case, both drivers agreed to not pursue any action. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

And that's the big question. By definition, 'homicide' is the taking of a human life. So when does "human" life begin? Conception? That's what most of the anti-abortion crowd claim. In that case, leftover embryos from in virto attempts are also 'human' and destroying them or using them for research should also be considered "murder." But sperm are alive. So your definition is also valid. I use the idea of "viable outside the mother's body" as the definition. So a fetus or an embryo are not human yet. I guess I have a hard time accepting the idea of forcing a woman to go through a difficult and dangerous medical situation. Carrying a baby to term and giving birth is not a trivial process. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

And yet again, there's a "bomb scare", but no evacuation, no bomb squad, no proper response to a real bomb threat whatsoever. Just arrest the kid and throw him in jail (juvie). [Mr Rogers Voice] Can you say 'lawsuit'? I thought so.[/Mr Rogers Voice]. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Not exactly. The first part of the 2nd A says "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state.." So the purpose of the 2nd is to have available a "well regulated militia." Which a lot of anti-gun folks have taken to mean the National Guard (state organized and funded militia). But, if you read the stuff associated with the writing of the Constitution, and specifically the BOR, you will find that they didn't mean a "state milita." They meant an "unorganized milita." Which was defined as all able bodied adult males. (women didn't have any rights back then, personally I'd include them today). And "well regulated" meant "well armed", not burdened with a lot of rules. Remember, one of the things the founding fathers feared was a standing army. In those days, the army (you know, the "state militia") was used far, far more often to suppress and oppress the civilian population than it was to invade a foreign country, or defend against foreign invasion. That "local militia" would defend against foreign invasion (something the Japanese were very aware of in WW2), protect the community during situations where the local law enforcement was unable to (natural disasters or large groups of bad guys), and be able to defend against government over reach. The second part of the sentence "..the right of the people to keep and bear arms." Covers stuff like hunting, self defense and all that. Funny how the "people" in the other nine amendments (the word "people" or "person" isn't in all of them, but it's implied) mean just that - individual people. But some folks choose to not accept that in the case of the 2nd. Which makes no sense. Because one of the original versions of the 2nd is longer, and includes this: "Composed of the body of the people." "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Wendy for the win! I like the Temp pins for "two" better than my locking pullup cords (didn't match the metre). "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Always with the negative waves!!! It's a mother beautiful story! It is a cool story. Glad to hear one where people help out, rather than screw up, a species and/or it's habitat. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Just how many grams are in grammar? Kinda depends on how much she ate at Thanksgiving, doesn't it? "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

This has been going on for over 6 years. I am a true believer Christian. They have to attack me whenever they see an opening. I and few others are the SC's flame magnets. You aren't attacked for your faith. At least not by me. "Mistakes of fact" are common. Calling someone "young and ignorant" when it is you that are mistaken is the problem. What does that have to do with your being a Christian (or at least claiming to be one)? Helpful hint: Look at the little info box by the username. It often shows the person's license number and years in sport. While this isn't verified, so it may or may not be correct, it often give you some idea. Jerry shows 40 years and D-1543 (that's 423 later than you). That would make me think he might not be "young and ignorant." "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Let's see: 1. Scotty was a personal friend. 2. Scotty was also my lawyer on some FAA stuff. 3. I am 75 yrs old. 4. I joined PCA in 1964. So who is ignorant? Jerry Baumchen D-1543 Well then you should have recognized what I was saying instead of trying a weak one-upmanship. Ummm... You were saying that Jerry was young and therefore ignorant. Because you seemed to think that the line Scotty used was his own, when anyone who's taken any sort of poetry knew perfectly well it was Dylan Thomas (even me, which is saying something). So you: A - Have no clue who Dylan Thomas is. B - Have no clue who Jerry Baumchen is (How much jump gear have you invented?) And you called him ignorant. Hence the Professor's comment about the irony meter exploding. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

And he's trying to help them, by making sure they don't go to schools that are "too fast tracked" for them. Bill Engval is right. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Bingo. That's why Trump scares me as much as he does. There's no way an intelligent, informed person could support him. But then there's no way an intelligent, informed person could be against vaccines... Or believe that the moon landings were faked... Or that the 9/11 attacks were done by the US government (and the Pentagon attack was faked)... And I just couldn't resist putting THIS in here. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

I fully agree that Trump is all bluster and bombast. No substance what so ever. Unfortunately, there seem to be a lot of people falling for it. The groups that are supporting him are older, less educated, lower income conservatives. Those types tend to feel unrepresented by the current Republican party and the current Democratic Party. They are tired of being told that their long time prejudices are "bad" (even though they are) and having somebody validate their beliefs gives them something to support, regardless of whether or not he has any substance. Keep in mind that Jesse Ventura was elected governor of Minnesota some years ago, using a very similar technique. He stunk at it. Trump scares the fuck out of me. Ventura was not capable of doing too much damage. A governor simply doesn't have that much power. President of the United States, on the other hand... "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

eventually yes, but civil courts are weird in this country and vary widely from place to place. It could take years for contempt to happen, if at all. The more likely scenario is the seizure of property and foreclosure on her house, and even that could take years. Don't forget that she is appealing the verdict. That will take a while to percolate through the system. IIRC, she had to put the money up (actually 125% of it) as a bond for the appeal to go forward. But it won't be paid to Mile-Hi until the appeal is denied. "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

Well, there's this: Care to make a guess who said it and when? (I have a link, but will post it later if needed) "There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo