Bob_Church

My son is a criminal defense attorney. He & I were talking about home protection weapons a year or so ago. He said that every criminal there is, stops dead in their tracks when they hear that noise. And they have no doubt as to what it is. Jerry Baumchen That Klu Klux sound. It's downright famous. In Ohio prisons, I'm told, the hostage type personnel use 12 gauge shotguns. One really big advantage is that you can do incredible damage to the person you're trying to hurt without punching through the wall and killing someone else.

IMO our access to guns has not changed. The guns have changed; they are now mass killing devices. Jerry Baumchen Sorry, I read that as handguns for some reason.

IMO our access to guns has not changed. The guns have changed; they are now mass killing devices. Jerry Baumchen No, I really disagree with that. When I was in high school there were a couple of times friends or I talked about using a handgun but had no idea where to get one. I can't honestly say how things would have turned out if we had, but we couldn't lay hands on one and we sure as hell couldn't afford to buy one either legally or hot. Now I have several friends and a couple of brothers who have them just laying around the house and if I wanted one I could steal it in less than an hour. They'd be pissed when they found out but if I was going on a spree I wouldn't care. I wonder how many handguns the average teen stumbles across when searching the old man's room for porn these days. Well, ok, ignoring the fact that they probably just use the computer for that, but you know what I mean.

Are there any small dropzones you could jump at? It can make a world of difference.

But surely they'd be in plain brown wrappers. There were people at Seigfred who had standing requests for computer boxes. They were well made boxes but they were welcome to them. When we moved or just moved stuff into the house I wanted government cheese and disposable diaper boxes. I didn't need people watching us carry in boxes that had held expensive electronics.

Exactly what I was thinking when I saw this video. I wonder who or why on earth anyone would ever let a student tandem wear their own camera. The big argument by students wanting to wear one is that they'll turn it on then forget it. Watching the student in this one shows what really happens. I'm not even talking about the malfunction but before that. He's busy geeking his camera.

It's from the sixth book, written by Colfer. It's not nearly as good as the others but not bad. What worries me is the length. I hate abridgements. I know that as a radio adaptation it's not technically abridged but I don't see how they can do it justice in three or four hours. Not that that stopped me from pre-ordering it.

We live in an age where anyone who votes differently doesn't have a different opinion, they're stupid. Seeing anything with more than Yes or No Good Or Bad is a fading remnant of the past.

Yeh, but I doubt they'd be interested in paying that much markup. I didn't do it with these but a few years back there was one of these packages for sale and they listed all the contents. You could put it together yourself for pennies on the dollar. I think the Mormons tend to be pros at this stuff and this is aimed strictly at amateurs.

I bought some "distilled spring water" recently. What's the difference between distilled spring water and distilled toilet water? Wendy P. "What? You mean water, like out of the toilet?"

More than likely what his instincts really tell him is to brag about his porn star liaison. That would be more his style. Being POTUS is cramping him big time! This is assuming that they actually had sex, instead of "It's ok Don, it happens to everyone now and then." edit: that wasn't meant as a joke

And none of this has anything to do with what I'm talking about.

Thanks for the heads up. I just pre-ordered it on audible.com. They say it will be available April 13th.

Have you ever heard The Tannehill Weavers? Think rock and roll with bagpipes.

What is that? I mean, how can it still be attached at that angle?

Rather than worry about shortening them, just make them active: 1. Highlight the entire URL 2. Click on the "url" button below the text box. Thanks, will do.

"Hundreds of doctors have walked off the job in Kenya, demanding systemic changes at a hospital where the wrong patient was recently subjected to brain surgery. It has been more than a week since a registrar -- a specialist doctor in training -- cut open the skull of the patient, who was only meant to have a non-invasive procedure, but the outrage over the mistake is still mounting." https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kenya-kenyatta-national-hospital-wrong-patient-brain-surgery-doctors-on-strike/ (which format/program do you use for shortened URLs here?)

It would be boring, but it's just so strange to see what the show does after reading about who created and writes it.

What platform is it on? It's on Showtime

Is anyone watching "The Chi"? I'm watching it out of sheer morbid curiosity. I don't want to give it away but I would like to run it by other people watching to see if we're getting the same "whuuut?" response.

"Evidence of need for owning a firearm of choice is not required. It is a Constitutional right. " This is something I keep seeing in relationship to things like high capacity magazines. I believe that trying to decide what people need or not is not going to go well with most Americans. If you have reasons to ban something then state them and maybe it will happened. But "why do you need that" is patronizing and not the way our law is supposed to work. We're not some pre-90s Eastern Block country where a committee decides what kitchen utilities we need enough to start manufacturing them.

Could you imagine the court case against the shrink the first time someone kills a few people after he/she signed off on their eval. Nobody in the mental health community wants to do that and hold that liability. It's one thing to make a medical decision that someone should not own firearms, that's something that takes a long evaluation and probably proof of violent behavior. The opposite is not true. That would be like the saying of checking for crocodiles, you can only find that it is there, not that it isn't. Exactly. And I suppose they could pass laws protecting them against lawsuits but still, the idea of spending a few hours with someone then giving a meaningful answer to the question "should this guy have a gun" is absurd. If you're a politician trying to make your constituents happy with bullshit then talking about it will help towards that end, but it will never be a useful tool against gun violence.

This thing about psych evals. Does anyone have any estimates on amount of time, that sort of thing? There are probably 200 million gun owners in the US, or we could go low and say 100 million. Are we really going to find trained professionals who would sign off on people being safe to own a gun? Or let some gun owner know that he's going to recommend that the government take all of his guns away? And after how much time with them? Originally the suggestion was that anyone who had a history of mental health problems wouldn't be able to own a gun.That has problems but it could be done. But now I'm hearing from several sources the idea of evaluating each person who owns a gun. We could get on that right after we count all the grains of sand on the Florida coast.

That study doesn't support your claim that people are being diagnosed with autism and PTSD in order to receive treatment for other conditions/disorders. "You have a child with parents in the middle of divorce or other things are going on and they just need someone to talk to. Unfortunately that's not covered by insurance so they end up labeled autistic or ptsd or something just so they can get the help." That quote is not from the study you referenced. No, it's not. FYI: It's considered better form to match the citation and quoted passage. I know, but that's only a quote in that it's my original statement, the one you disagreed with so vehemently but now don't even recognize. The way things were going it seemed like I needed to say it again. But it didn't help.

That study doesn't support your claim that people are being diagnosed with autism and PTSD in order to receive treatment for other conditions/disorders. "You have a child with parents in the middle of divorce or other things are going on and they just need someone to talk to. Unfortunately that's not covered by insurance so they end up labeled autistic or ptsd or something just so they can get the help." That quote is not from the study you referenced. No, it's not.