My thought on docking stations is that it'd probably be better to use some variation of ultra-short range bluetooth and an inductive charger - that way getting the thing precisely onto the dock isn't as important.
In all honesty, if you hit the right moment it'd be about 5 days before I'd notice. Just don't make phone calls all that often. Take away web or email and you'd have to time it just right after bedtime to get ~8 hours. Otherwise you'd be lucky to get 30 minutes before I'd be complaining.
Even then I don't hold the phone to my ear - I use a headset, basically the smallest BT earpiece I can find.
The problem I have with most 'clip on' battery packs is the lack of a dedicated port for them - you have to have that little cord running to the USB port, which ruins the lines and makes it more sensitive to be sticking into a pocket. Plus, you don't get proper power management that way, as the phone thinks it's still plugged in.
I honestly think that a true extended battery with a custom back is the better option - but you also run into that now your phone doesn't fit into standard protective cases. Do I go with the protective case(I've broken phones before) or the extended battery(I'm often in low signal areas)?
Hmm... With the new gel/polymer batteries that have no particular need to be a cylinder or even a square, maybe integrating the battery with the case back might be a good option. Heck, just have a port/contacts so you can ADD a battery. Keep the original battery in, just add a sleeve with an extended power battery integrated. Might make the phone 50-100% thicker, but if it gives you 5X the battery life, it's worth it to some people.
I managed to break a GalaxyS(not 2), but I did so by falling with it in my back pocket right onto ice with my butt. Before that, 'tossing' it to the floor by accident was pretty much a daily occurance and no damage was done. I got an otterbox for my next phone(atrix), and managed to break the case after a year. The phone is fine. Did the case do it's job, or is the phone just that tough? I'll have to see.
I don't know the specifics of what happened in your case, but there are reports of phones surviving things like multi-story drops out of helicoptors. A less than 1 story drop is supposed to be well within their design tolerance; even onto concrete.
Given my experience I figure there was some sort of 'aggreviating factor' to the cracking of the screen of your phone - being stepped or fell on, hitting something pointy on the screen, etc...
Thing is, asking for the 'best processor/most memory' in a smaller form factor is a bit like asking to put a V-8 diesel into a F-150. Yes, the additional processing capacity enables more tasks, but at this point how many of them are going to be extra painful to try to do on a smaller screen?
I have a motorola Atrix at the moment and I'd LOVE to have a larger screen. I already use a bluetooth headset and voice commands for making calls, so I don't feel the need for a smaller phone that's more convenient to hold to my ear, but I'd love a larger screen when playing games/reading emails and such. Would also like it to be a slider with an actual keyboard, and yes, I'd be willing to deal with the weight.
Right now I think my 'ideal' phone would have a nice large screen, and use the larger form factor to enable things like a larger, longer lasting battery(under heavy use), bigger higher gain antennas(cell, wireless, BT) for more range and better signal in remote areas(that I spend a lot of time in), and more armor(my otterbox tripled the size of my phone) so I don't need a seriously protective case(just something to keep the screen from being scratched).
Oops. Just realized that it looks like I was going to get a 90kw generator for my house... Nope, much smaller unit for me, my figures would be for a fairly large office building that 'no power' is not an acceptable answer.
I'd be looking more at a 12kw generator ($7k), smaller shed($2k), utilizing my pre-existing oil tank(for my boiler), doing much of the install myself, etc... Still closer to $833/kw, which shows that diesel power generation scales very well.
Well, I specified a diesel, which puts it on the 'top end' for houses, most of them are pretty big units, but I want one because my house is heated with #2 fuel oil, which you can use in a generator(just be careful with the fuel filter).
I was looking at $18k for a 90kw prime* diesel generator. 375A@240V. $2.5k for a transfer switch. The generator is basically 5x4, but let's go with a 10x12 shed so you have room to put it in and the ancillerary equipment in, do maintenance, avoid classification as a confined space, etc... Some research for that says $3k for a good shed. Let's say $6k total to put in a good intake/exhaust system. People aren't supposed to spend time in the shed with the genset running, but it's good practice to have clean air, the generator will run better anyways. Other tasks include handling the cooling properly - my generator building has the radiator build into the side of the shed, the muffler/exhaust above the roof, and pulls the air from another(filtered) panel to the outside.
Generator, 90kw: $18k Building for Gen: $6k Transfer switch: $3k Fuel Tank(1000 gallon, installed): $3k (90kw at ~90% should be around 7 gal/hour, should give you ~6 days.) Wiring, install, misc other: $3k Filling said tank: $3k, fuel use estimated at $1.5k/year at the 3 days of outage per year estimate. Plan on spending a couple hundred a year monitoring the fuel quality. Total cost: $36k for 90kw. $400/watt. If the wiring/hooking up the generator doesn't run that much, spend a bit more on the building.
*For those that don't know, generators are actually rated as Standby, Prime, or Continuous. Standby is only intended for short periods of times, Continuous is expected to run all the time at full rated power, and Prime is expected to run all the time at variable loads. Standby generators are generally built 'cheaper' or 'overrated' for their capacity and as a result don't last nearly as many hours as the other two. ** Rules state all over the place is 'don't run a generator inside, and there are good reasons for this. However, what we're doing here is basically building a custom building for the generator with provisions in place to toss the exhaust outside. Much like how mechanics shops in cold areas will have ventilation cones that go over the exhaust pipe so they can run the car safely inside where it's warm. Except in this case we seal it even better. I'd still install a carbon monoxide detector and leave the door open when I have to go inside.
It'd take more than that where I'm at. They built a house that doesn't need any carbon/exterior power source for heating, but they only did it by using about 4 meters of earth underneath the house, extending a meter out, in an insulated 'box' about 3-4 meters down as thermal storage using pex tubing. During the summer a solar electric panel powers a pump to run water through solar water panels to add heat to the 'box'. In the winter regular electricity is used to pump water through the tubing to bring the heat back out to the house.
Of course, Air Conditioning is unknown outside of server farm type applications.
That's an interesting phrasing; you must be a professional on the power end. Most people don't think of this stuff in cost per watts of capacity, but in cost per kwh.
A quick check shows that I can get a diesel backup generator for ~ $250 a kw(and I'm using prime figures for the generator). Doing a proper install will probably cost more than that. Call it $750 a kw, plus fuel costs when you need to operate. Still almost half that of what you quoted.
US politicians are far harder to bribe than most; and you don't get the outright kleptocracy that many other countries are. I'm going to say yes, it's much worse in other countries than you think.
As for corporations 'buying off' politicians, it's at least a lot more round-about and circumspect than elsewhere.
Sure, but it just shows you're a big hypocrite. If you really respected them, you'd leave them the fuck alone.
We did until they gave shelter to a dude who set up an operation to run planes into buildings, and was successful 3 out of 4.
Boy you're pessimistic/jaded. Better under foreign rule? As r00t mentioned, our government ISN'T as corrupt as Mexico's, heck, it's well in the top 25%. Says a lot about how bad 'average' is; but I've heard way too much about how US corporations can have trouble because we're generally unwilling to engage in the types of corruption that other countries expect; it's actually NEWS when a company or government official is caught.
As for killing innocents - No, it's not okay; but remember my mentioning shades of gray? The US Military actually puts a lot of effort into NOT killing non-combatants. Yes, it makes mistakes and screws up royally on occasion; but the military is made up of people and people make mistakes. I know it's cold comfort to the families of those killed to know that they were killed by miss or mistake rather than deliberate action, but it happens. At the same time, we can't just NOT take military action. We keep it down to accidents; for the most part, kind of like car accidents.
Lastly, you show that you don't pay attention. AQ in Afghanistan might of been decimated in the 'first few months', as was the Taliban. Yet both are highly adaptive and resilient organizations. AQ is a multinational terrorist group; Afghanistan was hardly critical to them(though highly useful). The Taliban are more entrenched there, and unfortunately we haven't gotten rid of them yet. As for a 'thoroughly corrupt puppet government', it's corruption is a result of the area, as for puppet, I'd rate it as a more democratic government than what's in Egypt at the moment.
Besides, we have to set up a government there if we want any assurance that another Taliban type group won't seize control the moment we're gone and go back to supporting terrorism.
Why would you respect a country you're occupying? If you really respected it, you wouldn't be there in the first place. Otherwise, you've obviously shown you have no respect for it by barging in with guns blasting, killing civilians left and right (and calling them "insurgents"), and using force to push your country's policy. It's really quite hypocritical.
Umm... Wow. Except for the fact that you'd most totally ignore it, this statement indicates that you could really use some study or course on military theory and history. Step 1 would be to recognize shades of grey, issues are generally NOT just black and white.
1. Respecting *SOME* of a regions customs and curtesies helps prevent you from making enemies of *EVERYBODY*. For example, in Iraq we have Sunni, Shia, and Kurd. Afghanistan is mostly Sunni, with Shia being most of what's left. In any case, some are willing to deal, some are hostile, etc... 2. Guns Blasting - If we were really acting like that; we'd have killed everybody by now. War is, by it's nature, a dirty affair, and mistakes get innocents killed. Insurgencies are even dirtier. 3. What policies are we pushing in Afghanistan? Iraq is debatable, but in Afghanistan it's pretty much 'don't engage in or support terrorist acts; especially against the USA'.
And you didn't give me enough information to attempt to explain.
Normal people 'work'. Somebody with $100M+ in the bank can easily make managing it a full time job. If they do it right, they'll be every bit as productive as a factory worker - because he'll make said factory worker more efficient by ensuring that the factory he's working in has the capital necessary for efficiency upgrades.
At that sort of wealth level, I actually have no problems with the rich dude's job essentially amounting to 'custodian of this pile of capital'. If he increases it through careful investment, that means that he's helped ensure that said capital was used productively. Ensured tools got into the hands of the workers, factories operated, etc...
Rich people are the ones providing money for startups, because they can actually afford the level of risk involved. They can afford to invest in 10 startups with a 50% chance to fail completely, but the prospect to make double or more if they succeed. A middle class investor would be risking their entire retirement savings on a coin flip in comparison. The rich guy has enough coin flips he's more like the house in a blackjack game.
Not playing the game would be somebody like Romney who has most of his assets in a blind trust doing the investing. Not a bad idea for a presidential candidate(he can honestly say that he's not favoring company X or Y because he owns stock), but not the best idea for somebody wanting multi-generational wealth.
Indeed, and one of the things that this pisses me off about is that they likely spent a couple hundred simply denying your claim.
To be honest, my ideal system is that everybody has a 'healthcare savings plan' combined with 'high deductible insurance'. Somebody else said that people used to have insurance like this - 'major medical'. Things like heart attacks, cancer, stroke, etc... Not a broken arm or leg. Ideally the HSP/HDI would be portable between jobs and even states.
A bleeding child should be treated because, well, it's actually very hard to have a child that's not covered(or freely eligible) by some sort of government medical insurance.
In a number of states 'Insurance' is not required if you post the appropriate bond. If the state requirement is $250k per accident medical, $50k property, if you post a $300k bond you don't have to buy insurance.
The difference is rather than paying ~$1000/year for your liability insurance, you can have that $300k earning you like $6k/year. Assuming you don't get in an accident.
They had never "lost" before, and it was devastating to them / they didn't know how to respond.
I hope your wife kept up that teaching method/activity. Sounds like they learned a critical life lesson far more valuable than the math skills that day.
Okay, we have the most recent rulings that DC can't completely ban firearms(Heller, 2008), and this includes states(McDonald, 2010).
The most relevant case I found from 1997 is 'Printz/Mack v United states' - Which struck down federal law mandating law enforcement to do background checks on handgun buyers and 'other tasks'. Which I'd also consider a loss for gun control proponents. Win for state sovereignty.
Can't really find anything in 1939, do you mean 1933's United States v. Miller? In which Miller had passed away by the time it reached the SC, and therefore no competent defense was mounted?
Modern proponents have constructed arguments that would have easily disputed the case presented before the SC of the time. For example - the WHOLE REASON short barreled shotguns were allowed to be banned was that nobody presented a military use for them. There's plenty of evidence of 'trench guns' - short barreled shotguns, being used during war at the time, which would have been brought up by a competent defense. Regardless, this is a dangerous case to bring up, because it would logically lead to MORE protection for 'militarily useful' weapons like the AR-15, SCAR, and other military pattern rifles over things like hunting rifles, semi-automatic 9mm like the Beretta(issued by the military) over revolvers(no longer used), etc...
Given the size and location of the town? I'm not sure they'd have been able to locate Pakistan on the map. Heck, given that it was conceived in 1930 and declared in 1933, I'm not sure it existed when they wrote the law.
Slashdot Mirror
My thought on docking stations is that it'd probably be better to use some variation of ultra-short range bluetooth and an inductive charger - that way getting the thing precisely onto the dock isn't as important.
In all honesty, if you hit the right moment it'd be about 5 days before I'd notice. Just don't make phone calls all that often. Take away web or email and you'd have to time it just right after bedtime to get ~8 hours. Otherwise you'd be lucky to get 30 minutes before I'd be complaining.
Even then I don't hold the phone to my ear - I use a headset, basically the smallest BT earpiece I can find.
The problem I have with most 'clip on' battery packs is the lack of a dedicated port for them - you have to have that little cord running to the USB port, which ruins the lines and makes it more sensitive to be sticking into a pocket. Plus, you don't get proper power management that way, as the phone thinks it's still plugged in.
I honestly think that a true extended battery with a custom back is the better option - but you also run into that now your phone doesn't fit into standard protective cases. Do I go with the protective case(I've broken phones before) or the extended battery(I'm often in low signal areas)?
Hmm... With the new gel/polymer batteries that have no particular need to be a cylinder or even a square, maybe integrating the battery with the case back might be a good option. Heck, just have a port/contacts so you can ADD a battery. Keep the original battery in, just add a sleeve with an extended power battery integrated. Might make the phone 50-100% thicker, but if it gives you 5X the battery life, it's worth it to some people.
I managed to break a GalaxyS(not 2), but I did so by falling with it in my back pocket right onto ice with my butt. Before that, 'tossing' it to the floor by accident was pretty much a daily occurance and no damage was done. I got an otterbox for my next phone(atrix), and managed to break the case after a year. The phone is fine. Did the case do it's job, or is the phone just that tough? I'll have to see.
I don't know the specifics of what happened in your case, but there are reports of phones surviving things like multi-story drops out of helicoptors. A less than 1 story drop is supposed to be well within their design tolerance; even onto concrete.
Given my experience I figure there was some sort of 'aggreviating factor' to the cracking of the screen of your phone - being stepped or fell on, hitting something pointy on the screen, etc...
Thing is, asking for the 'best processor/most memory' in a smaller form factor is a bit like asking to put a V-8 diesel into a F-150. Yes, the additional processing capacity enables more tasks, but at this point how many of them are going to be extra painful to try to do on a smaller screen?
I have a motorola Atrix at the moment and I'd LOVE to have a larger screen. I already use a bluetooth headset and voice commands for making calls, so I don't feel the need for a smaller phone that's more convenient to hold to my ear, but I'd love a larger screen when playing games/reading emails and such. Would also like it to be a slider with an actual keyboard, and yes, I'd be willing to deal with the weight.
Right now I think my 'ideal' phone would have a nice large screen, and use the larger form factor to enable things like a larger, longer lasting battery(under heavy use), bigger higher gain antennas(cell, wireless, BT) for more range and better signal in remote areas(that I spend a lot of time in), and more armor(my otterbox tripled the size of my phone) so I don't need a seriously protective case(just something to keep the screen from being scratched).
Oops. Just realized that it looks like I was going to get a 90kw generator for my house... Nope, much smaller unit for me, my figures would be for a fairly large office building that 'no power' is not an acceptable answer.
I'd be looking more at a 12kw generator ($7k), smaller shed($2k), utilizing my pre-existing oil tank(for my boiler), doing much of the install myself, etc... Still closer to $833/kw, which shows that diesel power generation scales very well.
Well, I specified a diesel, which puts it on the 'top end' for houses, most of them are pretty big units, but I want one because my house is heated with #2 fuel oil, which you can use in a generator(just be careful with the fuel filter).
I was looking at $18k for a 90kw prime* diesel generator. 375A@240V. $2.5k for a transfer switch. The generator is basically 5x4, but let's go with a 10x12 shed so you have room to put it in and the ancillerary equipment in, do maintenance, avoid classification as a confined space, etc... Some research for that says $3k for a good shed. Let's say $6k total to put in a good intake/exhaust system. People aren't supposed to spend time in the shed with the genset running, but it's good practice to have clean air, the generator will run better anyways. Other tasks include handling the cooling properly - my generator building has the radiator build into the side of the shed, the muffler/exhaust above the roof, and pulls the air from another(filtered) panel to the outside.
Generator, 90kw: $18k
Building for Gen: $6k
Transfer switch: $3k
Fuel Tank(1000 gallon, installed): $3k (90kw at ~90% should be around 7 gal/hour, should give you ~6 days.)
Wiring, install, misc other: $3k
Filling said tank: $3k, fuel use estimated at $1.5k/year at the 3 days of outage per year estimate. Plan on spending a couple hundred a year monitoring the fuel quality.
Total cost: $36k for 90kw. $400/watt. If the wiring/hooking up the generator doesn't run that much, spend a bit more on the building.
*For those that don't know, generators are actually rated as Standby, Prime, or Continuous. Standby is only intended for short periods of times, Continuous is expected to run all the time at full rated power, and Prime is expected to run all the time at variable loads. Standby generators are generally built 'cheaper' or 'overrated' for their capacity and as a result don't last nearly as many hours as the other two.
** Rules state all over the place is 'don't run a generator inside, and there are good reasons for this. However, what we're doing here is basically building a custom building for the generator with provisions in place to toss the exhaust outside. Much like how mechanics shops in cold areas will have ventilation cones that go over the exhaust pipe so they can run the car safely inside where it's warm. Except in this case we seal it even better. I'd still install a carbon monoxide detector and leave the door open when I have to go inside.
It'd take more than that where I'm at. They built a house that doesn't need any carbon/exterior power source for heating, but they only did it by using about 4 meters of earth underneath the house, extending a meter out, in an insulated 'box' about 3-4 meters down as thermal storage using pex tubing. During the summer a solar electric panel powers a pump to run water through solar water panels to add heat to the 'box'. In the winter regular electricity is used to pump water through the tubing to bring the heat back out to the house.
Of course, Air Conditioning is unknown outside of server farm type applications.
That's an interesting phrasing; you must be a professional on the power end. Most people don't think of this stuff in cost per watts of capacity, but in cost per kwh.
A quick check shows that I can get a diesel backup generator for ~ $250 a kw(and I'm using prime figures for the generator). Doing a proper install will probably cost more than that. Call it $750 a kw, plus fuel costs when you need to operate. Still almost half that of what you quoted.
US politicians are far harder to bribe than most; and you don't get the outright kleptocracy that many other countries are. I'm going to say yes, it's much worse in other countries than you think.
As for corporations 'buying off' politicians, it's at least a lot more round-about and circumspect than elsewhere.
Sure, but it just shows you're a big hypocrite. If you really respected them, you'd leave them the fuck alone.
We did until they gave shelter to a dude who set up an operation to run planes into buildings, and was successful 3 out of 4.
Boy you're pessimistic/jaded. Better under foreign rule? As r00t mentioned, our government ISN'T as corrupt as Mexico's, heck, it's well in the top 25%. Says a lot about how bad 'average' is; but I've heard way too much about how US corporations can have trouble because we're generally unwilling to engage in the types of corruption that other countries expect; it's actually NEWS when a company or government official is caught.
As for killing innocents - No, it's not okay; but remember my mentioning shades of gray? The US Military actually puts a lot of effort into NOT killing non-combatants. Yes, it makes mistakes and screws up royally on occasion; but the military is made up of people and people make mistakes. I know it's cold comfort to the families of those killed to know that they were killed by miss or mistake rather than deliberate action, but it happens. At the same time, we can't just NOT take military action. We keep it down to accidents; for the most part, kind of like car accidents.
Lastly, you show that you don't pay attention. AQ in Afghanistan might of been decimated in the 'first few months', as was the Taliban. Yet both are highly adaptive and resilient organizations. AQ is a multinational terrorist group; Afghanistan was hardly critical to them(though highly useful). The Taliban are more entrenched there, and unfortunately we haven't gotten rid of them yet. As for a 'thoroughly corrupt puppet government', it's corruption is a result of the area, as for puppet, I'd rate it as a more democratic government than what's in Egypt at the moment.
Besides, we have to set up a government there if we want any assurance that another Taliban type group won't seize control the moment we're gone and go back to supporting terrorism.
Why would you respect a country you're occupying? If you really respected it, you wouldn't be there in the first place. Otherwise, you've obviously shown you have no respect for it by barging in with guns blasting, killing civilians left and right (and calling them "insurgents"), and using force to push your country's policy. It's really quite hypocritical.
Umm... Wow. Except for the fact that you'd most totally ignore it, this statement indicates that you could really use some study or course on military theory and history. Step 1 would be to recognize shades of grey, issues are generally NOT just black and white.
1. Respecting *SOME* of a regions customs and curtesies helps prevent you from making enemies of *EVERYBODY*. For example, in Iraq we have Sunni, Shia, and Kurd. Afghanistan is mostly Sunni, with Shia being most of what's left. In any case, some are willing to deal, some are hostile, etc...
2. Guns Blasting - If we were really acting like that; we'd have killed everybody by now. War is, by it's nature, a dirty affair, and mistakes get innocents killed. Insurgencies are even dirtier.
3. What policies are we pushing in Afghanistan? Iraq is debatable, but in Afghanistan it's pretty much 'don't engage in or support terrorist acts; especially against the USA'.
And you didn't give me enough information to attempt to explain.
Normal people 'work'. Somebody with $100M+ in the bank can easily make managing it a full time job. If they do it right, they'll be every bit as productive as a factory worker - because he'll make said factory worker more efficient by ensuring that the factory he's working in has the capital necessary for efficiency upgrades.
With the whole 'the penalty is a tax' argument, couldn't you argue that it's deductible?
Actually, I believe it's always been deductible - but like most things you have to itemize in order to get it, and most people don't itemize.
At that sort of wealth level, I actually have no problems with the rich dude's job essentially amounting to 'custodian of this pile of capital'. If he increases it through careful investment, that means that he's helped ensure that said capital was used productively. Ensured tools got into the hands of the workers, factories operated, etc...
Rich people are the ones providing money for startups, because they can actually afford the level of risk involved. They can afford to invest in 10 startups with a 50% chance to fail completely, but the prospect to make double or more if they succeed. A middle class investor would be risking their entire retirement savings on a coin flip in comparison. The rich guy has enough coin flips he's more like the house in a blackjack game.
Not playing the game would be somebody like Romney who has most of his assets in a blind trust doing the investing. Not a bad idea for a presidential candidate(he can honestly say that he's not favoring company X or Y because he owns stock), but not the best idea for somebody wanting multi-generational wealth.
WTF am I paying an insurance company for?
Indeed, and one of the things that this pisses me off about is that they likely spent a couple hundred simply denying your claim.
To be honest, my ideal system is that everybody has a 'healthcare savings plan' combined with 'high deductible insurance'. Somebody else said that people used to have insurance like this - 'major medical'. Things like heart attacks, cancer, stroke, etc... Not a broken arm or leg. Ideally the HSP/HDI would be portable between jobs and even states.
A bleeding child should be treated because, well, it's actually very hard to have a child that's not covered(or freely eligible) by some sort of government medical insurance.
In a number of states 'Insurance' is not required if you post the appropriate bond. If the state requirement is $250k per accident medical, $50k property, if you post a $300k bond you don't have to buy insurance.
The difference is rather than paying ~$1000/year for your liability insurance, you can have that $300k earning you like $6k/year. Assuming you don't get in an accident.
They had never "lost" before, and it was devastating to them / they didn't know how to respond.
I hope your wife kept up that teaching method/activity. Sounds like they learned a critical life lesson far more valuable than the math skills that day.
right now the primary determining factor of a kid's economic and educational achievements is the achievements of their parents.
Looking through history I'd have to say that this is more the standard state of affairs, and 'right now' is no exception.
The exceptional period would be the time after WWII that allowed so many to enter the middle class.
Okay, we have the most recent rulings that DC can't completely ban firearms(Heller, 2008), and this includes states(McDonald, 2010).
The most relevant case I found from 1997 is 'Printz/Mack v United states' - Which struck down federal law mandating law enforcement to do background checks on handgun buyers and 'other tasks'. Which I'd also consider a loss for gun control proponents. Win for state sovereignty.
Can't really find anything in 1939, do you mean 1933's United States v. Miller? In which Miller had passed away by the time it reached the SC, and therefore no competent defense was mounted?
Modern proponents have constructed arguments that would have easily disputed the case presented before the SC of the time. For example - the WHOLE REASON short barreled shotguns were allowed to be banned was that nobody presented a military use for them. There's plenty of evidence of 'trench guns' - short barreled shotguns, being used during war at the time, which would have been brought up by a competent defense. Regardless, this is a dangerous case to bring up, because it would logically lead to MORE protection for 'militarily useful' weapons like the AR-15, SCAR, and other military pattern rifles over things like hunting rifles, semi-automatic 9mm like the Beretta(issued by the military) over revolvers(no longer used), etc...
Given the size and location of the town? I'm not sure they'd have been able to locate Pakistan on the map. Heck, given that it was conceived in 1930 and declared in 1933, I'm not sure it existed when they wrote the law.
In my memory, it didn't. I'm not saying it was a well written law, even for the time.
Nope; maybe if I'd been there for a few more years. As was I was the newest guy in the town by about a decade.
I'm now in Alaska and there are a number of dry towns due to the problems associated with natives and drinking, and Alaska law supports them.
However, in Alaska it's non-discriminatory - EVERYBODY in those towns have to be dry, be their heritage native, european, or other.