Leaderboard
-
in all areas
- All areas
- Adverts
- Advert Questions
- Advert Reviews
- Videos
- Video Comments
- Blog Entries
- Blog Comments
- Images
- Image Comments
- Image Reviews
- Albums
- Album Comments
- Album Reviews
- Files
- File Comments
- File Reviews
- Dropzones
- Dropzone Comments
- Dropzone Reviews
- Gear
- Gear Comments
- Gear Reviews
- Articles
- Article Comments
- Article Reviews
- Fatalities
- Fatality Comments
- Fatality Reviews
- Stolen items
- Stolen item Comments
- Stolen item Reviews
- Records
- Record Comments
- Record Reviews
- Help Files
- Help File Comments
- Help File Reviews
- Events
- Event Comments
- Event Reviews
- Posts
- Status Updates
- Status Replies
-
Custom Date
-
All time
January 20 2016 - October 6 2024
-
Year
October 6 2023 - October 6 2024
-
Month
September 6 2024 - October 6 2024
-
Week
September 29 2024 - October 6 2024
-
Today
October 6 2024
-
Custom Date
09/02/2020 - 09/02/2020
-
All time
Popular Content
Showing content with the highest reputation on 09/02/2020 in all areas
-
2 pointsBullshit. You applauded him for being there doing what he was doing, you said everyone should be there doing what he was doing, and you've said the shootings were only in self defence and were the fault of the people who were shot. In what way do you not support him shooting people? Says who? I have not seen any indication of that. Eyewitnesses have said the catalyst for the first shooting was Rittenhouse holding a black man at gunpoint who was trying to get into his own car because Rittenhouse assumed he was trying to steal it. The man who confronted him him about it - the first man he murdered - was unarmed. This chain of events is all Rittenhouse's fault, is a predictable consequence of untrained fantasist wannabe's inserting themselves into tense situations and will keep happening if more people head out thre to do what you want them to do. When trying to stop a heavily armed man who has just murdered someone? Sure, of course you believe that when trying to stop a murderer with an assault rifle you would not use the only makeshift weapon at your disposal. You're strong enough to take on 6 cops at once and save George Floyds life, I'm sure you could have just strolled up to Rittenhouse and taken his rifle away with one arm tied behind your back. WHO proved they were criminals and arsonists? Was anyone that Rittnhouse shot involved in that crime and arson or are you just smearing their memories in order to protect your political stance? Your reasoning is that a dumpster fire was set in Kenosha, therefore everyone out in Kenosha that night was an arsonist, therefore it was cool for Rittenhouse to shoot whoever. It's abhorrent. Consider this - while Rittenhouse was running around lying about being an EMT, Grosskreutz was an actual EMT who had been treating numerous people throughout the night and who never shot anyone. Yet you slander him as a violent looting arsonist who Rittenhouse was totally ok to shoot. Just think, he's a real person. It's despicable the lengths you are going to to dehumanise him and the other victims - with zero evidence - as nothing more than a pack of arsonists and looters just so you can defend your precious right wing militia. The police had already publicly and visibly abdicated their responsibility to deal with the armed right wing mobs roaming Kenosha. Many protesters had seen the police not just allowing the mobs to stay in curfewed areas while they were moved on, but thanking them and actively aiding them. Add to that the mob the Rittenhouse was in bragging that police were funnelling protestors towards them to 'deal with' and you can understand why they may not have felt the police would deal with him. And oh yeah I forgot... they were right. The police didn't deal with him. A running man with a rifle after multiple gunshots had been heard, followed by people shouting that he had shot someone and they just let him straight through. Free and clear to do whatever else he wanted that night. That's how the police dealt with the most serious crime which occurred that night.
-
1 point
-
1 pointok. Got approx 50 jumps on the Pelican now, and I also let others try it out to get their feedback. First of all it's very easy to fly, intuitive and stable - and not the least it's very comfortable. It can feel a bit nervous, but it is not. It just reacts quickly directly to input. It has some serious power and it is in the same league as the SQ Freaks / TS Hog. It has a natural flatter glide due to high up arm sweep design and so at first it feels slower, but if you know how to change angle of attack efficiently it can fly as fast as Freak's. However, naturally it wants to just hang up there which it certainly can do. It's just a glide thing out of the box. Transitions to backflying is very forgiving like a Havok and easy to learn. Flying it well/fast on the back is a bit more demanding than similar suits due to the high up arm sweep design again, but once you find out how to do this its is ok fine. It excels at XRW not more to say about that! It has a very beefy abrupt flare and pulling is totally easy. So in short; it does what it is supposed to do and excels at XRW. It has way more power than it is said to have on the website and to be quite clear it seems to have slightly more power than the TS Hog (flocking with friends its obvious) even though it is advertised to be less powerfull which I find is odd. I could need some heavy duty reinforcements on the booties to minimize wear and tear. I certainly recommend the suit to people that are not too lightweight; if you are skinny you will float up there for ever and flocking might be hard work coming down.
-
1 pointThis is one of those places where I have softened my stance - I switched what is primary on this topic. I agree with the basic ideology of your statement. We probably won't agree on most of the details, but, now I'm hoping for some stricter, more effective means of avoiding the abuse of the system, while stepping away from my all or nothing position I held previously. I'm still going to fight for what is morally right, but that, at least to me, means helping people is the morally right thing and is primary, as opposed to my old view being justice and anti fraud as primary.
-
1 pointNever thought my first forum post on DZ would be about jumping with dolphins... Anyway recently I did a clear & pull on the back of an inflatable dolphin and riding it down on the back. I exited at 6000 feet and we allready lost some weight earlier.. So there was just one other jumper left behind me and I had all the space.. I was able to get out facing the prop hugging the dolphin with it's tail clamped between my legs and choking the neck of the dolphin with my left arm (no worries it's not a living animal). The pilot was flying with almost zero prop and still it was one hell of a fight in the door. Somehow I was able to make a sort of stable exit and pull my pilot.. On opening I got a bit on the side because the dolphin got air.. While flying down the density is increasing which makes the dolphin deflates and this makes it harder to clamp the dolphin. So looking at your plan... I would say that making a dive exit the way you describe it...impossible unless it's a tiny dolphin. The dolphin will get air and unless you have strong arms and are some tunnel ninja you will be unable to fall stable. Please stay safe!
-
1 point
-
1 pointYes, she was. But she's changed her mind and her tune. Most people make mistakes. It's a measure of their intellectual honesty if they are willing to review their actions and words, and change them. I'm not holding her up as some example of incredibly intellectual honesty, just that holding her to a "no mistakes, ever" standard is not particularly reasonable, either. Wendy P.
-
1 pointDo you have an experience in writing? If you're interested in writing for us, please send me a DM and we can discuss it further (This will be a paid collaboration). We're looking for individuals to assist in writing some authority articles and help address some outdated content which needs to be re-written to account for changes in disciplines, technology etc. Looking forward to hearing from you.
-
1 pointHi Bill, It really depends upon the laws in each state. They do vary. Jerry Baumchen PS) IMO if a person has not been convicted, then they should be allowed to vote. You know, that whole thing about 'innocent until proven guilty.'
-
Newsletter