JohnRich

I'm wondering what the other pilot was thinking while all this was going on. Did he know his partner was nuts and also didn't want him back in the cockpit? Or did he think there might be people trying to take over the plane by grabbing the pilot?

Another good read is "Sea of Mud", by Gregg Dimmick. It tells the story of the battle of San Jacinto from the Mexican viewpoint, and the subsequent aftermath. The three branches of the Mexican Army were trying to consolidate for a counter-attack, and if they had succeeded, they might well have defeated the Texans, and changed the course of history. The southwest United States might still belong to Mexico. However, torrential rainstorms flooded all the rivers and turned the prairie into a "sea of mud" which bogged down the Mexican armies, and they were unable to move their troops, supply wagons, and cannon, or to ford rivers. Amongst much controversy amidst the officers, they eventually gave up and retreated to Mexico, where many of the officers were then court-martialed for their defeat and the humiliation of Mexican honor.

Thank you for your help - I am deeply appreciative, as I have never heard that term before in my entire lifetime, and I greatly appreciate your assistance in expanding my vocabulary and knowledge.

Yep, sounds fishy to me. The girl was shot in the ankle. The gun under the mattress would have to be laying on its side. So even if the gun somehow discharged under the mattress, the bullet would go parallel to the mattress, and it would not hit the girl jumping around on top of the mattress up above the gun. I don't see how those two things could intersect. People blame the gun all the time for their own sloppy gun handling. And that may be what's going on here.

Gosh, here in Texas the most you would pay for the state fee is $140. That fee is controlled by legislation to be a break-even operation, not for profit. The government should serve the people, not profit from them. I wonder why it costs so much more in New York? Texas concealed handgun fees: http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/feesReqDocs.pdf My latest renewal was only $35, taking advantage of a veteran's discount. The NY fee sounds excessive to me. I wonder if people would stand for that if the fee to register to vote was that high, or to register their dog? The one thing for sure: they wouldn't artificially raise the fee to discourage people from getting one. Nah, that can't be it...

To supplement your new-found knowledge of Texas history, the next time you're in Houston you should visit the San Jacinto monument, the battlefield where Sam Houston and a rag-tag band of Texans defeated the much larger and professional Mexican Army under Santa Anna. For other good stuff, visiit places like Goliad, Washington-on-the-Brazos and San Felipe.

Shouldn't this be in Bonfire? Did he kill some whales in accomplishing this feat? Did he do it to raise funds for a presidential candidate? Was he raising awareness for global warming? What's the Speaker's Corner angle here?

Go ahead and make an entry in your log book to honestly account for the unlogged jumps, to read something like: "I am hereby adding X jumps to my jump total to account for unlogged jumps made from Y-date through Z-date. This is to make my total correct, even though some individual jumps are missing." And then recognize that those missing jumps won't be counted when you try and qualify for licenses and such. But at least that makes your log book record as accurate as you can make it, reflecting your actual jump career. I've done that kind of thing before when reviewing log books and discover that I skipped two numbers, or something like that. I'll just make a new entry saying "I'm subtracting two jumps from my total here because I screwed up and skipped forward two back at jump #367, and this will make the total correct once again." And then add a note at jump #367 that says "I accidentally skipped forward two jumps here, but make up for that at log entry #455". That way, when someone is reviewing your log books for licensing, they can see that you've done the right thing, all the accounting is in order, and that they haven't actually caught you in an error.

Deer leg bones will almost always still have the hoof attached. Was it? I take it that a dog dragged this into your yard from somewhere else?

The question is invalid because the premise is incorrect - it is NOT okay to shoot criminals, just because they're criminals. They have to be doing something that threatens harm to others, like rape, robbery, assault or arson, before shooting them would be justified. And if they're doing one of those things, it doesn't matter whether they're legal or illegal citizens - their citizenship status is irrelevant.

You would prefer that Cheny be allowed to die, rather than give him a heart transplant? Would that same attitude apply to other people needing heart transplants also?

Someone asked me an AR question by private message, and I thought I would share that and my answer here, for anyone interested, since we're talking about AR rifles. Question: I was wondering if there is an AR-15, brand name, that you prefer. I was also wondering about barrel length, triggers, and sights. Are those red dot scopes worth getting for closer range shooting? I imagine that flip up sights would be needed to with that type of scope... Answer: I have a Colt, but I've seen other brands perform flawlessly too, so I'm not sure that matters. What I'm wary of is people that mix and match parts to build their own. I've seen cases where parts from different manufacturers don't work well together, even though they're all supposed to be built to the same specs. In trying to save a few bucks, you can get yourself a gun that isn't reliable. I have a 20" barrel, and it's good out to 600 yards. Shorter barrels are preferred by the tactical guys, but that limits your distance shooting. You also might want an "Hbar" or heavy barrel, which has a thicker diameter, and helps prevent warping from heat buildup. For long range shooting, you also want a fast twist rate in the rifling, like 1-in-7, which means one full revolution every 7" of barrel length. This is necessary to stabilize heavier bullets. The 55-grain bullets are standard, and work well in 1/12 or 1/10 twists. To use 69-gr or 77-gr you need that 1/7 twist. And 55-grain bullets just blow around too much in wind at long ranges. I participate in a competition called "high-power rifle", and the rules there limit triggers to no lighter than 4.5 lbs. That works fine for me. There are aftermarket triggers that drop in without specialized skills, and they are smoother than some standard manufacturer triggers. I just use iron sights. They're simple and reliable - nothing ever goes wrong with them. Lots of folks use fancy sight systems, but they're constantly fiddling with them, and things often go wrong. Some of those are specialized for target shooting, where you're always aiming at a black dot. One has an adjustable size rear aperture, and an adjustable size front ring, so that your sight picture has two concentric rings surrounding the black bulls-eye. That's a good system for black dots, but maybe not for hunting, as the field of view is very limited. I don't know anything about the fancy red dot or holographic optics, and have not used them. My understanding is that the dot cannot be made small enough for accurate long range shooting. Find out how many minutes-of-angle (moa) the dot is before buying. If the bulls-eye is a 4-moa dot, and the red-dot is 5-moa, then that doesn't help much, because you can't center the red dot inside the bulls-eye. Having back-up iron sights to the fancy optics is a good idea. Some scope mounts have a channel underneath them that allows the factory iron sights to still be used even with the scope mounted. That way when the optics fog up or the batteries go dead, you're still in the game. For target shooting, it's also nice to have a free-floated front end, so that the sling attachment point at the front sight assembly is not pulling on the barrel at that point. That interferes with the harmonics of the barrel and negatively affects accuracy. I don't know if any manufacturers make them that way though. I believe that's mostly an aftermarket modification. But it it's an option, I would get it. The AR-15's are very popular these days: they're accurate, reliable, have light recoil, and are cheap to shoot. And there are tons of ways to customize them. It's a great rifle, and you can't help but love it.

Let's say that someone invents a magic safety device for automobiles, say, something that would envelope your entire body in a giant airbag inside an eggshell, and retract all protruding objects like the steering wheel, and it would do all this in a fraction of a second just an instant before an impending impact with an object. It's so effective that it will save your life and prevent serious injuries in any crash under 60 mph. The only problem is that it costs $10,000 to install. So, are you going to quit driving until you can afford to have this magic crash system installed in your car? Or, because of the cost, are you going to go ahead and continue to drive, knowing that 40,000 people per year die in traffic accidents, and assume the risk of driving as you are without it? After all, during the 6-year lifespan of that car, that's only $4.50 per day. Isn't your life worth $4.50? And what about all the people who can't afford that kind of expenditure, because they just don't have that amount of disposable income - should they be called "foolhardy" for not buying one of these magic safety devices?

Where in the rules does it say that? And are the particular rules for the Incidents forum? From the "why your post got deleted" post at the top of the forum: "Secondly, while we encourage people to only post firsthand or _reliable_ secondhand accounts of incidents (such as a DZO's statement) there will be people who post simple speculation. This is discouraged, but there is no rule against it. If you post "don't speculate" it may be deleted, since lengthy discussions over whether or not someone is speculating serve no purpose. If you have reason to believe someone is posting grossly incorrect or misleading information, please PM a moderator and we will check it out." Right, so once again speculation is discouraged, that's twice they say it. So there is a policy of not speculating, but we're not allowed to tell people not to speculate, and the moderators seem to do little to enforce the policy and actually stop it. So the policy and the enforcement behavior are at odds with each other. See the problem here?

The "Incidents" forum should be for facts only. If you want to speculate or to discuss related issues, start another thread in one of the other forums to discuss it. Instead of whining about not being able to talk about things like balloon emergency procedures in the incident thread, just go start your own thread elsewhere. Why is that so difficult? When you do all the speculating and side-discussions in the actual incident thread, it makes it difficult for anyone to keep track of what the facts actually are. And if we're not going to do that, as above, and allow speculation to run rampant even though the thread rules say that "speculation is discouraged" while moderators do little to control it, then we ought to just quit pretending to want the facts, and change the name of the "Incidents" forum to the "Speculation" forum. Then there wouldn't be any confusion about what it actually is. I propose to keep "Incidents", but regulate it to facts only. Then have a mirror forum called "Speculation", where the exact same incidents can be discussed in one place, but no one can be led to believe that it's anything other than speculation. Just call it what it is.

ALL the time? That must be your hyperbolic way of saying sometimes, or occasionally, or rarely-but-when-it-does-it-gets-a-lot-of-press. My definition of "all the time" is multiple instances per day. Here's a sampling of recent stories for you. "A former West Fargo police officer accused of hitting his girlfriend in the face during a altercation..." http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/354692/group/News/ "U.S. District Judge Catherine Blake sentenced Baltimore Police Officer Jerry Diggs, Jr. today to 30 months in prison for conspiracy to commit and committing extortion under color of official right..." http://www.fbi.gov/baltimore/press-releases/2012/baltimore-police-officer-sentenced-to-30-months-in-prison-in-majestic-towing-company-extortion-scheme "A Concord Police Officer has been arrested following a domestic violence incident..." http://blog.sfgate.com/incontracosta/2012/03/19/exclusive-concord-police-officer-arrested/ "The board of aldermen at its meeting tonight voted to forgo an immediate investigation into citizens' complaints about police conduct..." http://www.theadvertiser.com/article/20120319/NEWS01/120319023/Washington-citizens-allege-police-misconduct?odyssey=nav|head "A short-term detainment by police of two Chicago newsmen over the weekend as they worked a story about a 6-year-old child who was fatally shot is now flaring as film footage of events leading up to their confrontation include a comment by a one cop declaring: ''Your First Amendment rights can be terminated if you're creating a scene or whatever…'" http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-seattle/chicago-cop-your-first-amendment-rights-can-be-terminated "Charges against a former Atlanta police officer accused of assault were dropped after a plea bargain was reached... The encounter left Swichtenberg with a broken arm and the former officer arrested on four felonies..." http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/dpp/news/local_news/Assault-Charges-Dropped-Against-Former-Atlanta-Police-Officer-20120319-pm-pk "A Lincoln police officer was spared prison time on Monday for kicking a handcuffed woman in the head..." http://www2.turnto10.com/news/2012/mar/19/14/lincoln-officer-be-sentenced-kicking-woman-ar-970423/ "An officer accused of throwing a woman to the ground, knocking her teeth out, did use excessive force, according to an internal investigation..." http://www.wesh.com/news/30684568/detail.html#ixzz1pKH8iFOQ "A Yakima police officer is accused of misconduct... Police say their investigation is done and the allegations have been substantiated. http://www.yakima-herald.com/stories/2012/03/17/city-refuses-to-turn-over-investigation-into-officer-misconduct "Many say they saw an officer shoot the teen while his hands were in the air, his back facing the officer and no gun in sight..." http://www.kfor.com/news/local/kfor-exclusive-passenger-speaks-on-chase-shooting-20120317,0,2241861.story "A Winter Haven man died because of the way Orlando police officers subdued him — including with repeated jolts from a Taser. A medical examiner determined the death was a homicide..." http://www.theledger.com/article/20120316/NEWS/120319422 "Three federal complaints of excessive force accuse Chicago police officers of shooting a dog while its owner begged for its life, assaulting a child with a Bible, and running into a man with a squad car, breaking his leg..." http://www.opposingviews.com/i/politics/brutal-week-chicago-police

Don't Mom's teach their kids this rule any more?"Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me."If someone is pointing a gun at you and calling you a coon, he's an asshole, and is not worth getting shot over. The proper response is to walk away. Real cops exhibit bad attitudes towards citizens and mishandle situations all the time.

All the anti-death penalty liberals here seem to think that a 1,000 guilty murderers should go free in order to save one innocent man on death row. And the ironic thing is, those are the same people who are here calling the shooter a murderer, without even having any facts yet for a basis upon which to do that. It's funny how that double standard works: Death row murderers = Innocent, Gun owner = Guilty.

It would also be a very stupid response. The smart response would be to just walk away. Assaulting someone who is holding a gun while armed yourself only with your fists, is a sure way to get shot. Proceeding in that manner is likely to lead to a predictable end, and not in your favor.

See attachment.

If the kid assaulted the man for simply following him, then that was itself an unprovoked, illegal and unjustified response. And if that assault was serious enough, then the shooting could indeed still be legally justified self defense.

The price of gun freedoms is that some people will be accidentally or wrongly shot. The price of free speech is that some people will publish hateful things. The price of freedom of assembly is that some people will hold offensive public protests. The price of freedom of religion is that some people will be offended by public religious symbols. Freedom isn't free. If you want cheap, we could eliminate all those things and save some lives. But would it really? And would the price savings be worth it? Would the loss of lives from NOT having those things be even worse? t Would you prefer safety at the expense of freedom? Just think what a perfect world it could be. Nobody walking around with guns. Those darned neo-nazis not publishing racist tracts. Those gross "occupy" protestors not shitting in the streets. Those darned religious folks not praying and erecting crosses all over the place. Yeah, that would be sweet... Or would it?

Are you sure it's done from 18,000 feet? Looking at their web site... http://www.skydivealabama.com/ Gosh, okay they DO advertise tandems from 18k, with oxygen. My oh my. You'll enjoy the heck out of that!

Freedom is like that, and compared to the cheaper alternative, well worth the cost in the long run.

Aw come on now, the lynch mob here has already got him tried and convicted as guilty. They don't need no steenkin' facts. You're going to spoil all their fun.