Bignugget

I asked that to the poster, and he said he was the last out and after he opened he counted all the other canopies on the load (an otter) 'like he always does' and made sure they were all landed before he removed his helmet to shoot the selfies. Personally, at my experience level I don't know that I could count every canopy accurately after a jump. Certainly not quickly enough and confidently enough that I was confident in drawing the conclusion I was 100% alone in the sky. (Was there 20 on this one, or only 19... etc.) I suppose I am of the mind that a full otter load, means a full sky until my feet are back on the ground. I could see some grey area, but also plenty of danger, which is why I posed the original question. A controlled jump with a secured device where you were alone in the sky would certainly reduce the risk to others, imo. Tandem instructors have much higher levels of experience than I do, and the jumper in question here as well. Again, I think there probably IS grey area. "With proper planning, a selfie - like nearly anything in skydiving - can be done safely. Clear air and a tethered camera/helmet should deal with the vast majority of the risks." Agreed, I guess that is the key to executing anything well. Proper planning and execution.

Today I saw a picture on FB from a jumper who had taken his helmet off under canopy in order to snap some shots of himself flying around. I don't have the experience level of most of you, but to me it seems that you would lose a great deal of awareness during this activity. I liken it to driving in rush hour traffic (how I perceive a crowded sky) while using your phone to take selfies, which would be quite dangerous, although the risk of death with a collision is lower. Risky with 1/20 doing it, crazy dangerous when 15/20 start doing it. Again, all in my less than expert opinion. I am wondering what the consensus is on this from a safety standpoint? Is it fine? Is it an issue? Is there grey area? Thanks!

As one of my other buddies put it. This was his 'moment of clarity'. I wish I had that sexy southern drawl put I am Missouri bred unfortunately. I am glad he made it. Lets not lose sight of the goal however, FRIDAY FREAKOUT VIDEO.

Couple pics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GK777OsbY4U Pretty fckin close. Recent video from a friend of mine. Wild stuff. Spread it around and get his dumbass on Friday Freakout! disclaimer: the guy who pulled was on the same dive and apparently went low early, tracked off, and was never seen by anyone including the guy filming. guy filming has like 220 jumps, other guy had like 900.

A lot of reasons. You don't want a mini-bignugget running around, trust me.

Do you have any examples of this happening in other energy related pollution cases? Or any cases of non-energy related industrial pollution where they did as you are suggesting? I sure don't remember any. I don't think its right that they came in, went bankrupt, and left a bunch of dangerous shit around. But it the problem is certainly not isolated to solar panel makers, or this company. How many superfund sites are in your state? Out of the dozens in my state I seriously doubt you can find one case where they put the owner of the company in jail, and seized his house. The company has no assets, that is why they declared bankruptcy.... The CEO's assets are not accessible to creditors, or to pay for any clean-up. No more than Jamie Dimon's assets are available to pay the JPM fine were JPM to go bankrupt.... If you are calling for a change in the laws so that corporation officers are held (directly) financially responsible for the actions of the corporation.....go for it....not sure how that will resonate with your GOP buddies... Personally I would love to see the JPM fine split among the officers.

What sort of response? The place is shut down.....who are they going to raid? The company is in an insurance dispute over who is going to pay to clean it up. What solution are you looking for? I am a supporter of the EPA, I think making sure things like this actually end up clean and safe and fixed is a great job for government. Right now it seems like the clean up issues are state issues, which should make a state's rights kinda guy happy. The fed is staying out of it. So yes, I support environmental agencies state and federal, I think this should be cleaned up, and I think it is being addressed pretty well. Hell, just down the street from me is a superfund site contaminated from the Manhattan project. A few miles down the road is another one contaminated with TCE that affects the water supply... I wish the EPA did a hell of a lot more than they do, but I hate job creators. Side note: Isn't this place in the same town as the lady who hates Mile Hi Skydiving?

A less absurd report. http://www.bcbr.com/article/20131011/EDITION/131009918 $3.7 million to cleanup. It looks like the solar company is suing their insurance company for refusing to pay for the clean up, after they went bankrupt......sounds convoluted and fucked. Hopefully it gets done right. What I wonder is, you guys who argue that the EPA (in this case the "Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment") is nothing but a job killer, business hater..... If they weren't involved in the process would that be a good thing?

Lol, SWAT teams. For sure. Its just because its a solar company that the SWAT teams and US marshals aren't tracking "offenders" (I assume the owner?) down....dispatched by the EPA. hahaha. It probably is fucked up what they did, but you lose all credibility on your "report" when you spout nonsense like that. PLENTY of corporations have done TERRIBLE shit to the environment/left toxic shit around and VERY VERY VERY rarely ever see ANY sort of criminal consequence.....nothing to do with the type of energy the company was pursuing, or the federal loan guarantees they had securing some of their financing. Everything to do with the fact that the EPA has 0 authority to dispatch US Marshals and SWAT teams.

He wouldn't be the RUSH we all know (and love?) if he did that.

Yes, but the problem is that the bible thumping dipshits are all herping the derp over the sanctity of marriage, not the sanctity of registered domestic relationships. Agreed. I have argued that before, just call it something else if "marriage" makes the right's head explode. As long as this dude could get fucking death benefits after his spouse of nearly 20 years is killed in the line of action I dont care if you call it "the kung fu panda pact"

Thought this was interesting in light of the thread discussing homosexual parents atm. An interesting local story just popped up, related in a sense, A MO Highway Patrol Officer was killed in the line of duty, and his partner (in the biblical sense) was seeking survivor benefits. Denied because they weren't legally married, which they can't be under MO law it is illegal and there are laws specifically prohibiting it. http://www.bnd.com/2013/10/29/2874600/mo-court-rules-against-troopers.html He served his state with honor, died in the line of duty,but since its illegal to get married in MO as same-sex....too bad so sad for the surviving member of the relationship. ""If Glossip and the patrolman had been of different sexes, Glossip would have still been denied benefits no matter how long or close their relationship had been," the Supreme Court wrote. "The result cannot be any different here simply because Glossip and the patrolman were of the same sex. The statute discriminates solely on the basis of marital status, not sexual orientation."....... "Glossip and Engelhard lived together since 1995." The irony of course is that the OTHER statute discriminates based on sexual orientation. But since the one discriminating on sexual orientation disqualified them from being able to marry, this one applies, and the survivor is screwed.

all i am saying is there wrong because there is not enough evidence and not enough time for anyone to be sure, you would need more then one generation to know the full effects if ANY. So the guys saying its bad are wrong and the people claiming they know it has no effect are wrong as well. ***nation-wide, conservative agenda Maybe that depends on where you live I guess, I feel like I have been surrounded by LOVE gays agenda. That’s very annoying as well and just as stupid and baseless and lacks logic. Let’s judge people on an individual bases regardless who you might affiliate them with or what their sexuality is. Lets not pretend that the secret to a well balanced child is gay parents. My point stands there is not enough evidence to be sure of any effect positive or negative. regardless of what people would like to believe. If one video of a well dressed kid well spoken kid is a case then one video of a drugged out kid would be the counter, either way none of them should mean shit. Thats my point. I don't think you will find many homosexual couples who argue "Lets not pretend that the secret to a well balanced child is gay parents. " That is not the argument at all. The argument is that ONLY heterosexual couples can raise a well-balanced child. Totally wrong, as shown by that ONE example. Bottom line is, as you said, treat everyone as an individual with the same rights as everyone else, regardless of their sexuality. Gay couples should be afforded all the rights of heterosexual couples.

I don't wonder. I solved it. Since I support Obama, he didn't screw me over. Same with the old lady, and Kallend. I find irony in you citing a report from Al Jazeera too.

Oldie but a goodie. If there was ever a reason to stop the gays from marrying and raising kids this video is one. Imagine if there were 100,000 more of this kid walking around! You think there is a lot of gun violence now, start allowing these people to multiply, that dude looked about 3 frosted flakes away from a rampage.

yeah. Because you only get that in the military - nowhere else in life... You know the difference between you and the special forces guys you seem to idolize? They don't try to brag about serving or suggest it makes them better or different to other people... Their quiet professionalism is one of the things that gets a huge amount of respect. Your attitude is a joke. 'Look at me! Look at me! I was in the military!'. So what? That doesn't make you better or your opinions worth more or less than anyone else. Get off your high horse. +1. The guy yelling the loudest usually has the least to say. I always find time to stop and thank members of the service when I am traveling and see them in uniform, don't get much exposure to them otherwise. Tough job to sign up for voluntarily, not sure how it applies to political leanings though. I guess you only sign up when a president you like is in office? And then hope he stays in office while you are in the military? Isn't that super unlikely? You sign up and start on his day 1, and get out 8 years later before hes gone? Maybe thats what regulator did.

There's a central point to all of my complaints about the government. No offense to you, personally. But the People of the US have forgotten who the boss is. I'll give you a hint...the temporary employee who sits in the White House isn't it. There might be some invisible behind the scenes puppet master. But the face of power is Obama, and that is who the boss is for all relevant discussions on trash talking the boss. I've never been in politics but I have had plenty of jobs. I can't think of a single one that would allow you to publicly trash the people above you with no consequences.

http://www.wtae.com/news/local/allegheny/pittsburgh-woman-finds-incredible-deal-with-affordable-care-act/-/10927008/22698256/-/l53xqa/-/index.html?hpt=us_bn7 57 year old gets a $77/month policy. Not bad, not bad. Probably voted for Obama.

1) In a perfect world neither happens, in my version of the world, there are no guns. So that isn't quite right. I accept that women may be raped and do not believe an armed population will stop that from happening. 2) I don't wish that it costs you more. I think it's ironically funny. I find irony in the fact that it appears only the people who vehemently hate Obama are having these horrible experiences with the ACA. 3) I would support a game rigged in my favor, or a level field, but I wouldn't support a game rigged in favor of someone else. Common sense there.

TBH I secretly (not anymore) hope you are right. I hope Obama sits at home at night like Santa Claus and marks Kallend and Bignugget as good, so we don't get screwed, and then marks Turtle and Rush as bad, and screws you good. That would be very entertaining to me. You gotta be careful talking smack about the boss. He might end up screwing you over good. Lucky for me I am much smarter than that.

You guys are just angry we all knew the right people to keep cheap affordable awesome health insurance, while you all got screwed. Sucks to be you, maybe now you guys will start backing the right horses. Also, I agree, it is all women's fault.

Government manipulated Capitalism is wonderful. FIFY You love it when it manipulates farms, coal, gas, steel, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc

Hehe...it quoted you numbers. Nothing about coverages or deductibles. Nothing more dangerous than a little information. Ill keep checking in for more information, but they have to at least meet the minimum mandate. My current policy meets the mandate (is grandfathered in) and is going to run me ~$250 a month from here out, $1000 deductible.

I randomly went to the HC.gov site watching Colbert. It won't let me sign up, says its down for maintenance, but it quoted me a bunch of plans and prices based on my age and location. https://www.healthcare.gov/find-premium-estimates/#results/&aud=indv&type=med&state=MO&county=St.%20Louis&cov=self&age=49andUnder Those are all WAY cheaper than what I pay now......might have to give this marketplace thing a look.