Douva

I've seen it once at my old DZ. I landed off and was walking in a few minutes after everybody else. Another jumper walked up and warned me not to walk into the hangar unless I was certain my rig was in date because everyone else who had just landed was having their repack cards inspected by an FAA official. I was in date, so I went ahead and walked in, but by then I guess he had either lost interest or just didn't notice me because I never got checked. --Douva I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

I GOT IT!!!! It took me about an hour, but I got it. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

As a struggling filmmaker/screenwriter, I often try to hone my skills by writing short screenplays. Sometimes they come out pretty good, and sometimes I realize that I need more practice. Anyway, one of the screenplays I recently wrote was about a group of people trapped in a convenience store that is being robbed. It might be interesting for parties on both sides of this debate to read it (it takes about 10 minutes to read) and comment on how they would handle a similar situation, given their stance on concealed carry. Here is a link to the screenplay: CLICKY http://www.angelfire.com/biz/setpa/MSG_WAV/Pit_stop.doc --Douva PS. Be forewarned that the screenplay contains quite a bit of cursing. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

If the bad guys are going to carry anyway, shouldn't the good guys be allowed to carry in self defense? Allowing only the bad guys to be armed is not a prudent solution. What do you think would have happened to the U.S. if we'd decided in 1960 that nuclear weapons are a bad thing and completely disarmed? What few of us were left alive would be speaking Russian. We had some rain at the DZ last Saturday, so a few of us spent about an hour out in a field shooting pistols. We had a lot of fun. If you ever make it to Skydive San Marcos near Austin, TX, on one of your skydiving trips to the U.S., we'll take you shooting. You might find it's actually quite enjoyable recreation. --Douva I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

I attended a taping of The Price is Right, but I didn't get picked to be a contestant (even after they seemed intrigued that I listed my occupation as "skydiving instructor" during the pre-show interview). If you ever decide to go to a The Price is Right taping, be prepared to get up at the ass crack of dawn and spend about eight hours waiting in various lines before you actually get to see the taping. Despite not being picked as a contestant, I did get to see a couple of rare events. One girl got the $1.00 spot twice in a row on the big wheel (winning her $11,000), and a woman in the showcase showdown guessed within $250 of her own showcase and won both showcases. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Holy crap! Add that list to the girls that work at SDA Is anyone else scared?? Just remember, Brains, we have to at least wake up by the following Wednesday in time to make our flight to Nationals. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

If you're suggesting that Americans regularly use their legally concealed weapons in retaliation against someone spilling their beer, hitting their car, or picking a bar fight, I suggest you start getting your cultural knowledge of the US from something other than the tele. If you're seriously wondering why we might want to carry weapons, I'm sure we can provide you with a few examples. For a start, how about checking out this post I made earlier in the thread. As many other people have pointed out in this thread, most of us have never needed to use a fire extinguisher, air bag, lifeboat, AAD, or concealed handgun, but they can all be really nice to have when you need them. --Douva PS. I think the main reason for our difference of opinion is cultural. You are raised to fear and loathe an object--guns. We are raised to accept guns as simply another tool with both positive and negative applications. I suppose if a child spent his whole life hearing nothing but horror stories about all the atrocities committed with butcher knives, he'd probably wonder why anyone would want to own one of those, either. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

If you can't show that a law has value, but it can clearly be demonstrated that it hurts people, then the law should be repealed. If it's too hard to do, then tough luck, eh? Good social science is not that hard, it's just unfortunately filled with unethical and/or math challenged people. Take waiting periods that have the intent of enforcing a cooling off period. They don't work, and it's pretty logical why that is so. It's not hard to look at the numbers, both of killers who waited the 3/5/10 days or just resorted to illegal purchases or alternative weapons. And we also know that women have died waiting to get their weapon so they have a fighting chance against their ex. Your debating tactic - you can't prove a negative - has no value in the real world. Virtually all laws have consequences and need to be justified. Or at least have a sunset, like the AWB. We're going to quickly see how worthless that legislation was when the sky doesn't fall over the next year or two. Again, you're comparing apples to oranges. Waiting periods were designed to reduce crime. It is easy to determine whether or not crime went down after a law was enacted. Disallowing carry in bars was not designed to reduce crime; it was designed to prevent crimes that might result from mixing newly enacted concealed carry laws with alcohol. There is no old data to compare current statistics to. Therefore, my point that you "can't prove a negative" was indeed very solid. Obviously, there is no way I can prove that these laws prevented crimes from happening, rather than the crimes simply not occurring because they never would have occurred without the laws. I was not using a "debating tactic," trying to win some sort of nonexistent match on a technicality; I was pointing out a very real flaw in your logic. --Douva I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

You weren't planning on breaking real laws anyway, so what value is there in a law that keeps you and your friends from carrying in a bar? It hasn't stopped a serious crime (which was it's stated purpose) so what good is it? Oh, but Kennedy, it caused him to leave his gun behind so that just in case he got to the bar and then became a raving, violent psychopath, he would be without his gun and couldn't do as much damage. You know, because the government must treat us all based on the worst things we might do. And someone like Douva simply can't control his impulses, and doesn't know himself that he won't just go berserk in the bar if he happened to have his gun. (That's sarcasm, Douva -- it's not meant in seriousness.) - Actually, I seldom drink, so logically, there's no reason I shouldn't be able to carry in a bar. Perhaps everyone in this thread arguing for concealed carry in bars would be okay carrying in a bar. But the fact remains that alcohol undermines common sense, and every aspect of carrying a concealed weapon, from the logic behind it to its practical applications, hinges on common sense. I would rather accept that I loose the right to carry when I enter an establishment dedicated to the loosening of inhibitions than see an increase in violence by concealed carry holders that would fuel the flames of the antigun lobby. Do you support concealed carry in venues dedicate to the consumption of other drugs, or are you only concerned with alcohol consumption? You keep throwing facts and figures at me, but how do you dispute the studies that identify alcohol as a catalyst behind the majority of the "wild west" shootouts? Most of your arguments make sense, but you continue to disregard the fact that the more alcohol you consume, the less sense has to do with anything. --Douva I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

But you can't reasonably say, "Prove that something has NOT happened because of this law." How exactly do you prove that? Should we find an alternate dimension where the law wasn't put in place and document the multiple incidents that occurred as a result? Can you say the number of bad things has gone down as a result of something? That is a change, something that can be proven, or at least demonstrated. According to your logic, no law can ever be proven effective or ineffective. That is not the case. Your problem is you are not thinking creatively because you have already accepted it, and think other should do the same or don't matter. Kennedy, if the basic concept of "proving a negative" is too difficult for you to grasp, there is no point in me continuing to debate you. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

OK, so it doesn't stop the people who are a danger to society, and doesn't prevent real crimes. OK. You weren't planning on breaking real laws anyway, so what value is there in a law that keeps you and your friends from carrying in a bar? It hasn't stopped a serious crime (which was it's stated purpose) so what good is it? Don't tell me you're so naive as to think this law was implemented to keep bars from being robbed. Its stated purpose is not to keep dangerous criminals from carrying in bars; it's stated purpose is to keep people from getting drunk while carrying. Therefore, in many cases, it is serving its stated purpose. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Well, by all means, what we really need is a half dozen armed drunks trying to stop him. There's no way the end result to that situation could be anything but positive. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

I was in Ukranian Skydiver magazine (June issue was dedicated to skysurfing), but they never sent me a copy. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Who says the laws are ineffective? Sure, if someone is intent on carrying a gun in a bar, a law isn't going to stop them, but that doesn't mean it doesn't stop anybody. It keeps me from carrying in a bar. It keeps my friends from carrying in bars. I'm sure it keeps hundreds of thousands of people from carrying in bars. If we weren't worried about breaking the law, we wouldn't have gone through the trouble and expense of getting licensed to carry our handguns in the first place. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

It's fair to ask: "prove that this law has value." Quote But you can't reasonably say, "Prove that something has NOT happened because of this law." How exactly do you prove that? Should we find an alternate dimension where the law wasn't put in place and document the multiple incidents that occurred as a result? I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Turtle lives in Texas. Any vote cast for anyone but Bush is only a statement -- Bush is a lock here. So it's the best possible time to vote your conscience -- the more votes Badnarik gets in Texas, the stronger the statement it sends that people who just can't bring themselves to vote for Kerry still feel strongly about Bush and/or the two-party system. It's not like voting for Kerry in Texas will make a difference, after all Wendy W. This scenario proves once again the flaws of the electoral college. There are probably millions of voters in this country who won't vote because they realize their votes won't effect the outcome of the election. There are certain states, particularly my home state of Texas, which are an absolute lock for one candidate. The best we can do, like Wendy said, is use our votes to make a statement. If enough of these disillusioned voters will go to the polls, despite not being able to affect the outcome of the election, our statement would come across loud and clear. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Ok how about a guy with an actual CHANCE at getting elected? I like Libertarians....But any vote cast for them will be wasted. That's the defeatist attitude that ensures the survival of the two party system. Sure, a third party candidate won't win this election, but if more and more people will just start voting for the person they consider the best candidate, instead of the person they consider the most "electable" candidate, someday we might actually vote the best candidate into office. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I mean....ummmmm....uhhhh......GREAT! I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Instead of asking, "Why carry a gun," why not ask, "Why not carry a gun?" When asked this question, I always point to the case that was the catalyst behind Texas finally getting legal concealed carry. On October 16, 1991, Suzanna Hupp and her parents went to the Luby's cafeteria in Killeen, TX, for lunch. Suzanna was in the practice of carrying a pistol in her purse for protection, but she had become concerned about loosing her chiropractors license if caught carrying a concealed weapon in Texas, which was then illegal under all circumstances, so she decided to leave the gun under the front seat of her car. After all, lunch at Luby's isn't exactly a high risk situation. While she and her parents were eating, thirty-five year old George Hennard drove a 1987 Ford Ranger pickup truck through the restaurant window. He then exited the pickup, yelled "This is what Bell County has done to me," and opened fire on the patrons with two handguns, only pausing to change magazines as needed. When the shooting started, Ms. Hupp reached into her purse for a gun that wasn't there. Both of her parents died. When the smoke had cleared, George Hennard had killed 22 people. Suzanna Hupp went before the Texas senate and told them that if she'd had her gun, she could have made a difference. Now citizens with no criminal record who have passed multiple FBI fingerprint and background checks, as well as training and testing, can carry concealed handguns most places in Texas. Concealed carry hasn't caused an increase in crime (some studies say it's actually decreased it), so again I ask, "Why not carry a gun?" I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

My canopy doesn't have a name, but my skysurfing board is named "Betsy" after Davey Crockett's rifle. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

I keep hearing the argument, "Show me one incident where a law has prevented something from happening." What you are asking is that we prove a negative. One of the basic rules of both journalism and debating is that you can't prove a negative. Find a new argument. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Other stupid stuff.... 1. We all exited the chopper at 4,000' in hover mode, and one guy, unable to track, simply dumps right under me. I probably passed about 30 feet from his canopy. 2. That girl who flew through that guy's canopy and split it in two at 800.' That was pretty stupid. 3. As the week went on, the helicopter briefing got less and less thorough until on one jump they forgot to tell us that the helicopter exits over a different landing area. After landing at the helicopter landing area, we all looked up to see one of the woman on our load flying away from us in deep breaks, desperately trying to make the main landing area a couple of miles away. She landed in a corn field and hitchhiked back. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

It's not as bad as everybody likes to make out. Everyone likes to hype the wild stuff. The last time somebody started cracking down on rule breakers at the WFFC, everybody got pissed and moved the convention to another town. Let everyone have their fun. If you don't want to go, you don't have to go. I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

Basically, unless there is a chance the thawed food has spoiled (i.e., it's been a month since you thawed it or it's been out back on the picnic all afternoon) it's safe. The idea that refreezing thawed food is inherently dangerous is an old wives' tale. --Douva I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

It was even cold for the canadians! Quote Anybody else do the high altitude jump? I wore so many layers of clothing that my arms were pointing almost straight up from all the drag (I was on my board). I will be planning for all weather contingencies this year. --Douva I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.