AndyBoyd

"extending the fear to develop power"

Can you think of another President in recent history who has done this? Your man W based his entire Presidency on the politics of fear.

The economic problems we are in developed over years, if not decades. They will not be solved quickly, regardless of which political party is in charge. If it makes you feel better, criticize Obama all you want. But we are all in this together.

"In the case of drugs... any drugs.... if you are putting yourself on the radar of the people who make it their business..... BILLIONS of federal dollars per year.... to go after drugs and fill our jail with non violent users.... then you better be squeaky clean.

Look at the bullshit pulled on Tommy Chong. The feds have been completely out of control for years... and the crap they have pulled over the last 30 years is proof. Then when given catre blance by W and Asscroft.... yes.. what you say can and will get you looked at.

To think otherwise.. is BRAIN DAMAGED"

I wrote an article advocating the legalization of medical marijuana when I was in law school. No police or DEA agents have ever bothered me.

As far as being BRAIN DAMAGED, I plead guilty. 20 years at the DZ and 3 years of law school will do that to a guy.

You won't believe me when I say this, but we are on the same side on most issues. Relax.

"If you are fucking STUPID enough to advocate possesion of illegal drugs ( and there are a HELL of a lot of them) then you had best be prepared to live with police intervention in your life..."

"if the idiot is stupid enough to advocate possesion.... I feel sorry for his naievete..and he has to be a loonie... if he actually has the drugs in his possesion."

I think maybe you're confusing two different concepts here. Arguing (1) that it is a good idea to break the law by possessing controlled substances is not the same as advocating (2) for a change in the law that would make, for example, the possession of small amounts of marijuana legal. Very few people would argue in favor of (1). There are numerous thoughtful articles in newspapers, magazines, etc., in favor of (2). In fact, there is a good Op/Ed piece in today's Chicago Tribune in favor of the legalization of medical marijuana.

Would you argue that the police would be justified in raiding the author's home in search of marijuana based on this article?

I don't mean to hijack the thread, and I hope the thread stays on track. Just needed to throw my 2 cents in on this peripheral issue.

Your profile indicates you have 26 jumps. If this is accurate, you are still getting a huge adrenaline rush from every jump. It is natural to feel a bit of a psychological let-down after the adrenaline rush goes away. If it is hitting you so hard that you are not able to leave your home the next day, this is not natural, and it is possible you are having more signficant emotional issues. I am not a doctor, and I would not presume to tell you what to do about this. But to answer your question, that much of a let-down after jumping is most definitely not a normal thing.

Does anyone know of a place that sells creepers?

This has already been debated in another thread, so I won't be long-winded. I do not use an RSL on my sport rigs. I just don't feel like I need it. When I did tandems, I kept the RSL hooked up. My thinking was that with a student strapped to the front of me possibly kicking and screaming on a cutaway, it was better to get the reserve out immediately.

Quote

It's been over a decade, but I took it. I agree with what was said - take a sample first to assess yourself.

Then take a class. I took Kaplan. I think classes rarely can hurt. If anything else it gets you more comfortable with the test and the process.

For me, the classes did absolutely nothing. I thought they were a waste of money. (I took the Princeton Review). There are plenty of books out there that can coach you through the process of learning how to take the exam.

"what is the alternative, not shoot back because they are using human shields, against any war convention?

when you are under fire, you fire back. you try to hit only those who are actual firing but it is not always possible (and Hamas is making sure it won't be easy)."

Shoot back all you want. But if you do so knowing full well you will hit civilians, then you have intentionally targeted the civilians, and you have lost the right to claim moral superiority.

As far as your question re what are the alternatives? I have to admit, I don't know. Of course Israel has the right to defend itself like any other nation. But Israel is causing tremendous damage to civilians in Gaza just like it did in Lebanon in 2006. The cycle of death and destruction never ends.

"yes, sometimes you will accept civilian casualties if a target is important enough. and yes, if Hamas uses a school to launch rockets from, they are also responsible for it being hit. Israel targeted the source of the fire, whoever used a school as a source of fire is responsible for the result."

Then Israel targets civilans sometimes. To say otherwise is just dishonest. I'm not sure Israel is entitled to the moral high ground here. But neither is Hamas. I have no horse in this race.

"it is bloody and I hope it will stop."

I agree.

"what is wrong?
hurting civilians? yes.
targeting civilians? much more so."

What do you mean by "targeting"? Here's a hypothetical question. Suppose Israeli forces discover that Hamas is firing rockets from a school playground somewhere in the Gaza Strip. Israel also knows that Hamas fighters are holed up somewhere in or very near the school. Israel decides to bomb the school in order to kill the Hamas fighters and destroy the rockets. But Israel knows that if it does this Palestinian civilians, including schoolchildren, will be killed and injured. Would you argue that Israel has "targeted" the Hamas fighters and the rockets but has not "targeted" the civilians? If that's your argument, you are drawing a very fine line.

"It's like if I was throwing shit and garbage over the wall into your yard and you came to my door and punched me in the nose, then all the neighborhood kids started screaming about what an asshole YOU were for doing that."

No, it's not like that at all. That analogy is absolutely awful. You have actively called for genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza a number of times in this thread. Genocide is nothing like punching someone in the nose.

I'd like to ask you a couple of questions. Would you really be happy if Israel killed every man, woman, and child in Gaza? How would you propose Israel do this? Even the Israelis claim to be trying to avoid civilian casualties to the extent that they can. In your view, is Israel therefore waging this war inefficiently? If your answer is yes, how should they proceed? How would you propose Israel deal with the surely horrific consequences of waging indiscriminate war, as you advocate? America is obviously Israel's biggest supporter in the world. Should America assist Israel in killing everyone in Gaza?

It seems to me that you haven't really thought out the consequences of what you are proposing. Maybe you ought to start doing so at some point.

"Or else just wipe the place off the face of the earth. Innocent civilians in Gaza ? They ELECTED Hamas. Fuck 'em all."

And we elected George Bush. Think for a bit about where your logic leads.

Are you really advocating genocide? It sure sounds like it. Slaughtering civilians is not the answer. There are approximately 1.5 million people in the Gaza Strip. Your answer to this problem is simply to kill them all? If you are joking, it's not funny. And if you are serious, I am thankful that you are not in a position of power.

"And how many of those will be innocent women and kids?"

"Doesnt matter."

Yeah, it does matter. If you can't understand that the loss of innocent life in war is tragic and that nations at war ought to seek to avoid civilian causualties, your moral compass is in serious need of readjustment.

Yes, I understand that civilians sometimes are harmed and killed in war, and that this is sometimes unavoidable. But to say that the loss of civilian life is irrelevant and meaningless is an unbelievably callous statement.

Wow. That video made my palms sweat and got my heart rate up. It's been 5 years since I've done tandems, and I admit that I'm not sure what the "textbook" procedure would be in that situation. If the drouge had been hung up for that long, thought, I'd be pulling silver.

"I say there is no morality rule in humor. There is nothing in this world that is beyond making fun of."

How about a fatal automobile accident? A child with cancer? The 2004 tsunami in Thailand that killed 8,000 people? The Holocaust? The nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? There are things in this world that are not funny and never will be.

As far as the original question here, that skit made me uncomfortable. Making fun of someone's blindness seems like a nasty cheap shot. I'm sure there are others who find making fun of the disabled absolutely hysterical. I'm also sure there is nothing I can say to the folks who enjoy that sort of humor that would change their minds.

Quote

Quote

...You can get a DUI in that state if you are "impaired to the slightest degree," regrdless of your blood alcohol content...

Since you are an attorney from IL I won't argue with you if you correct me but I was told that in the state of IL if you are deemed impaired by the officer that pulls you over even if your BAC is only .01 you could still be arrested for DUI.

AZ is very serious about DUI like you said. I went to school down there and there were commercials all the time warning about not drinking and driving and the consequences if you did. There was a ridiculous number of TV ads for DUI attorneys also. So if you get a DUI but you have a few days left in AZ turn on the TV and you can find an attorney.

I am not a DUI attorney. I got this info from the cyberdriveillinois website maintained by the Illinois Secretary of State. In Illinois, you are automatically DUI with a BAC of .08 or greater. With a BAC between .05 to .08, you can still be DUI, but additional evidence is needed to convict. It does not seem that in Illinois, you could be DUI with a BAC of lower than .05.

After a weekend of fun jumping and tunnel training at Skydive Arizona, a few of us headed to the Bent Prop for dinner and a beer. This was Sunday night, the 23rd. I had a hot dog & fries, and 3 beers over a period of about an hour and 15 minutes. After I left the Prop, I got pulled over for rolling through the stop sign at Tumbleweed & Shedd. The cop put me through a half hour of field sobriety tests, which I passed. He still wrote me up for rolling the stop sign, which is going to cost me $95.

The point of this post is not to rant against cops, the guy was just doing his job. But the Holiday boogie season at Eloy is cranking up, and I thought people should be aware that Eloy cops patrol the area outside the DZ looking for people coming out of the Prop. Also, since I'm from Illinois, I did some research on AZ DUI laws. Without going into too much detail, AZ is VERY harsh on drunk drivers. You can get a DUI in that state if you are "impaired to the slightest degree," regrdless of your blood alcohol content. And ALL DUI convictions result in at least one day of jail time in AZ.

If you are heading to Eloy this Holiday season, be careful with your drinking at the Prop, and obey all the stop signs and speed limits around the DZ, including I-10 and Jimmy Kerr Rd. You don't want to be balancing on one foot counting to 30 in front of the flashing lights. Trust me, it is not fun.

Quote

Quote

Why not ask the jumpers that have a faster fall rate to buy a suit that has excess material under the arm pits to the waist.

Hey guys, since I'm unable to learn to pick up the fall rate, would each of you spend between $300 and $500 on a new suit you'll wear just when you jump with me? It'll need some excess flapping material, so you'll need to deal with slight loss in your flying ability. Thanks a BUNCH

Quote

If he was doing a multiple revolution turn above 1000' for his swoop, he could activate his Cypres, causing a two-out, etc, etc.

Not on my Spectre 150.

If someone is so uncoordinated that getting knocked unconscious on the way out the door on a hop n pop is a serious possibility, that person has no business skydiving in the first place.

If we have low clouds and are doing hop n pops, I leave my Cypres off. Can't see any reason to have it on, and the downside is obvious.

I very nearly hit a huge deer driving home from CSC on Ill. Rte. 30 just east of Big Rock this last Saturday night. It was a huge male with antlers. If I had hit it, I would have been badly injured or worse. I almost spilled my beer swerving around it.

You lost this one badly. Let it go.

Thanks, Kirk! You can engineer that one for us Saturday. :)