AndyBoyd

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    612

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

Posts posted by AndyBoyd

  1. Hinckley, July 4, 1994. Porter. At 2,000, the plane shuddered (not sure how else to put it), and the pilot said exactly that "Get out of the plane now." We did. Everyone, inlcuding the plane, landed safely in a beanfield. Apparently a small screw broke in the elvatator. The pilot was able to obtain another screw and repair the plane in the field. We resumed jumping it that same day.

  2. My 2 cents on this. I'm not a big-way guy. To me, 18 or 20 people in the sky is alot. But I have done a little 4-way, not enough to get all that good, but enough to know that skydiving at a serious level is expensive. I've spent as much as the OP is describing on 4-way camps. I've done some Airspeed 4-way camps that have been very pricey, but worth every penny in terms of the uptick in my skill level. I don't do 4-way anymore mainly because of the cost (although there are other reasons). I guess what I'm trying to say is if you just want to hang out at the DZ, make 5 or 6 jumps and have a few beers a few times a month, skydiving is not too expensive for most folks. But if you want to get serious about it in any discipline, you've got to pay up. And look, the free market will sort this stuff out. If people won't pay for the big-way or 4-way or whatever-way camps, they won't exist.

  3. I think what this poster is trying to say is that there is a historical trend in America towards expanding civil rights. This happenned for women and minorities in many different ways. Things that we take for granted now -- women as equals in the workplace, interracial marriage, for example -- were not always the norm. We can see this inevitable march towards acceptance happening today with attitudes towards homosexuality. Young people today are much more likely to be tolerant of gays and support things like gay marriage, while older people are not so tolerant.

    http://www.newswise.com/articles/americans-move-dramatically-to-acceptance-of-homosexuality

    If this trend continues, 50 years from now when most of us are dead and gone, or at least old and gray, being gay will be no big deal, gay marriage will be the norm, and everyone will wonder what the fuss was about. Kicking and screaming against this inevitable evolution towards equal rights is pointless. The country's attitude towards gay rights is slowly and inevitably changing towards tolerance.

  4. Quote

    Quote

    I don't own any businesses. I made my point twice, as clearly as I could, with support from an external source, and now you want to change the subject. You are not worth my time. Continue your anti-Obama rant. Have fun. By the way, if you own businesses and find yourself running to the bank for emergency loans all the time, you might want to think about restructuring a few things.



    See, Andy, that was my point. You have never run anything. All of your knowledge comes from someone telling you how it is. You have absolutely no idea of what effect the loonyness of Obama's policies have on real world businesses. Perhaps if more people would lose their fear of failure and leave the comfort of that weekly paycheck, they would start to gain some real insightful knowledge instead of what's taught in the academic world.



    Did you run your business into the ground, and now you're mad at Obama? Is that what this is about? Sounds like you've got real problems. I like my weekly paycheck, thanks. Maybe the bank will give you another loan. Best of luck.

  5. I don't own any businesses. I made my point twice, as clearly as I could, with support from an external source, and now you want to change the subject. You are not worth my time. Continue your anti-Obama rant. Have fun. By the way, if you own businesses and find yourself running to the bank for emergency loans all the time, you might want to think about restructuring a few things.

  7. The idea that any one person can destroy the US economy is silly. The guys quoted in the article obviously have a political axe to grind. The economy cratered under a republican administration. The recovery is agonizingly slow under a democratic administration. The economy will likely continue a very slow recovery regardless of who is elected president.

  9. I read an article online about the most bizarre form of athletic cheating I've ever heard of. Athletes in the Paralymipcs who have spinal cord injuries apparently cannot get the normal blood pressure boost that comes with exercise. So in order to get that boost, they intentionally cause themselves pain before competitions by, for example, breaking their toes or blocking their cathaders. This is called "boosting", and it is against the rules, but frequently done.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/boosting-paralympics-2012-8

    BTW, just replying to the last post.

  10. Quote

    Quote

    Quote

    We've got a well known oilman/rancher here in Texas, said the same thing. :D Only he put-up billboards expressing his feelings.
    To me, it looks like Obama is trying to destroy this nation from with-in. Dunno...


    Chuck



    What do think President Obama's motivation would be to destroy this country? I'm asking a serious question. Do you really think he ran for President with the hidden motive to destroy the United States:(? How did he hide his motives from his staff and all the people who helped get him elected? Or are they in on it too?


    I think what Obama is pointing out is that like, the ground, and the air, and also food, shelter, good health, all the things that people thank God for is not a place the government should try to place itself, or a President.

    [/:(]It's rudely overbearing at best, dangerous to liberty, it's why we are all living in fear now.... some people are.

    and even if it's naively meant as good will, in the real world business-wise on a global level it's counter-productive. It's problematic in all governments now.

    More people working at the FAA to review skydivers PLA's is but an example.

    Business and trade on a global level now is tough. The US with it's financial troubles because of years of past bad business, wars, past bad business is making it even more difficult.

    and to the green movement, its not good for the planet. It has pushed business out of the US and the EU into Asia and they are polluting the other-side of the planet 10x worse than the US and Europe ever did, or would in the future if citizens & governments allowed clean USA/EU business to better meet the needs of all of us, instead Asia is.

    So yeah, overall, currently the effect is to destroy the United States.


    How long do you think it will take Obama to destroy the United States, if he is reelected? After he destroys the United States, what will be left? A huge pit of sand?

    The idea that any politician can "destroy" the United States is absurd. People who say things like this on public forums look silly. The United States has survived Reagan and two Bushes, not to mention Gerald Ford repeatedly falling down the stairs and Jimmy Carter lusting in his heart and beating off crazed rabbits. The union will survive regardless of who is elected President, folks. Relax.

  11. Quote

    We've got a well known oilman/rancher here in Texas, said the same thing. :D Only he put-up billboards expressing his feelings.
    To me, it looks like Obama is trying to destroy this nation from with-in. Dunno...


    Chuck



    What do think President Obama's motivation would be to destroy this country? I'm asking a serious question. Do you really think he ran for President with the hidden motive to destroy the United States? How did he hide his motives from his staff and all the people who helped get him elected? Or are they in on it too?

  12. Quote

    >Do you think Biden is capable of assuming the role of President if something were to
    >happen to Obama?

    Yes. He is far from the sharpest tool in the shed, but then again, neither is Obama (or Romney, or Ryan.)



    Yes, Biden has foot-in-mouth disease. But Obama was on the law review at Harvard law school. Romney has a joint law/MBA degree from Harvard. Ryan has a BA from Miami University (Ohio). These are very bright guys. I'm not sure where you are coming from with this comment.

  13. Quote

    Quote

    You will likely get your wish and see this guy killed. Sorry it won't happen quickly enough to suit you.

    You really didn't answer my questions, though. So let's try again. What parts of the judicial process would you bypass in this case? Should this guy get a trial? An appeal? State or federal habeas petitions? What specific legal rights would you take away from this guy, and why? And who makes the decision to take away this guy's rights? And what specific criteria do we use to decide when we are going to take away criminal defendant's rights? In other words, what new legal rules do you propose we use, and why?




    I don't want to figure all of that out.



    And this is the problem, right here.

  14. You will likely get your wish and see this guy killed. Sorry it won't happen quickly enough to suit you.

    You really didn't answer my questions, though. So let's try again. What parts of the judicial process would you bypass in this case? Should this guy get a trial? An appeal? State or federal habeas petitions? What specific legal rights would you take away from this guy, and why? And who makes the decision to take away this guy's rights? And what specific criteria do we use to decide when we are going to take away criminal defendant's rights? In other words, what new legal rules do you propose we use, and why?

  15. Quote

    Quote

    Quote

    How could that even remotely be true? I've read that depending on the state, facility, etc. that housing a prisoner costs tax payers "around" $45K annually.

    I don't see how an execution would equate to even one year in prison, financially speaking.



    It's not the actual execution that is so expensive - it's all the legal wranglings leading up to it.

    The laws should be overhauled so that clear cut, caught red handed BS like this gets the proper treatment.

    There is no excuse to keep this person alive.



    +1



    Who gets to decide when a situation is so "clear cut" that certain individuals get fast-tracked to the death penalty? What criteria do we use to make this decision? How would you draft legislation to make this work?

    Look, I understand the anger towards this guy. But what you are proposing simply is not going to work in America. Everyone gets due process of law. And yes, in death penalty cases, the process is long and drawn out. This will not change, and it shouldn't. We can't have a system where certain individuals are simply fast-tracked to the gas chamber, and others are given full due process of law. Any legislation attempting to do this would immediately be found unconstitutional.

    You may well get your wish and see this guy executed. But it won't happen any time soon.

  16. Quote

    How could that even remotely be true? I've read that depending on the state, facility, etc. that housing a prisoner costs tax payers "around" $45K annually.

    I don't see how an execution would equate to even one year in prison, financially speaking.



    http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=42

    The first line of the article: "The death penalty is much more expensive than life without parole because the Constitution requires a long and complex judicial process for capital cases. This process is needed in order to ensure that innocent men and woman are not executed for crimes they did not commit, and even with these protections the risk of executing an innocent person can not be completely eliminated."

  18. Quote

    Quote

    The fact that they can't seem to prove that Z is a racist helps Z case also.



    it's not pertinent to the case - unless we are now in a thought police state

    only actions matter



    This is 100% wrong. In almost all crimes, there must be criminal intent in addition to the physical act.

    http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/mens+rea

    Edit to add: everyone agrees GZ shot TM. The only question is whether he had any criminal intent when he did so.

  21. You are probably not driving your right elbow and shoulder down hard enough. If you cannot see tail's reserve handle, you are not doing it right. ;)

    Before anyone gets all bent out of shape, that's a joke. Seriously, if your formation is turning 180, it is highly unlikely you are the sole cause. Have an experienced coach look at a video of your exit. That's the only way to figure out what's wrong.

  22. Quote

    Quote

    I know I will get spanked by the pro-gun crowd for this, but please believe me, I am by no means anti-gun. Here is my take on this incident. This was a young college girl who had way too much to drink, and somehow got into the wrong house. Was she in the wrong? Of course. Did the homeowner have the right to use deadly force? I reluctantly agree that he did. But the reason I do not have a gun in my home is because I do not want to shoot someone like this. Yes, again, the homeowner had the right to shoot. But if he had killed her, he would have had to live with the fact that he killed a drunk, lost, harmless college kid for the rest of his life. I don't want that on my conscience. The risk I take is that I may not be able to defend myself against the real bad guy that breaks in. So I live with that risk. I guess I'd rather live with the risk of getting hurt or worse because I'm not armed than the risk of shooting some drunk, harmless kid and having to live with the guilt.

    I hope I haven't riled up the pro gun crowd too much. I repeat that I respect the right to bear arms and also this homeowner's right to do what he thought he needed to to defend himself. Fire away, so to speak, pro gunners.



    what an odd post

    "pro-gunners" want to have the right to choose for themselves on the topic and respect the right of others to choice the same or differently.

    The anti-gunners want the right to make choices about the topic for other people. They also respect the right of others - as long as they agree with them.

    I guess you are a pro-gunner



    Can a pro gunner have no desire whatsoever to own a gun? If so, I guess I am a pro-gunner. But like Wendy said, I guess I'm pro-choice.

  23. Quote

    But I would wager that the number of people that accidentally break into a home (like the one in this story) are a lot less than those that break into homes to commit crimes.



    I'm not aware of any stats on that, but this certainly seems accurate at first glance. The homeowner in this story had reason to be alarmed.

  24. You are right. I hope I never have to face that situation either. There is risk either way. I'm sure there are also folks who will regret forever their decision to have a gun in their home. But as I've said, I have no problem with the safe and responsible gun owner.

  25. I know I will get spanked by the pro-gun crowd for this, but please believe me, I am by no means anti-gun. Here is my take on this incident. This was a young college girl who had way too much to drink, and somehow got into the wrong house. Was she in the wrong? Of course. Did the homeowner have the right to use deadly force? I reluctantly agree that he did. But the reason I do not have a gun in my home is because I do not want to shoot someone like this. Yes, again, the homeowner had the right to shoot. But if he had killed her, he would have had to live with the fact that he killed a drunk, lost, harmless college kid for the rest of his life. I don't want that on my conscience. The risk I take is that I may not be able to defend myself against the real bad guy that breaks in. So I live with that risk. I guess I'd rather live with the risk of getting hurt or worse because I'm not armed than the risk of shooting some drunk, harmless kid and having to live with the guilt.

    I hope I haven't riled up the pro gun crowd too much. I repeat that I respect the right to bear arms and also this homeowner's right to do what he thought he needed to to defend himself. Fire away, so to speak, pro gunners.