Ammo is the second most unreliable part of any weapons system. The first is the human operator. I've shot well-cared for 30-year old 7.62x39 ammo that had a failure rate of 2 in 5. 40%. I've only ever had one ammo failure in my Glock 22 in all the thousands of rounds I've put through it. I've had perhaps half a dozen misfires in my Anaconda with only a couple hundred rounds put through it. My Beretta 92FS Brig has misfired dozens of times with various brands of ammo, all of which were brand-spanking new and many of which were of a quality brand, Cor-bon and Hornady. My Marlin 336SS jams up so often that I now have to send it back to the manufacturer for an attitude adjustment. My SKS has a tendency to not fully close the bolt after firing.
Gun control laws don't work so there's no point discussing them.
Guns can be reliable. They can also fail miserably. I do an excellent job maintaining my guns and ammo. Still I've experienced many failures. Few however were the fault of the gun (the 336 and SKS problem certainly are though). Adding electronics to a gun won't make it more reliable though. It will undoubtedly make it more likely to fail. Suddenly we'll be faced with the prospect of guns that have to be serviced every 200 shots, or guns that only have a shelf-life of 5 years. That's absurd. I made a lot of other points about the "smart" gun in other threads. Check my profile if you want to read them. I think I asked some interesting questions though. With blood on your hand with the "smart" gun still recognize you, for example?
BTW, I forgot to ask, since you have a compact firearm and given the fact that they are usually purchased for a specific reason, do you live in a state with a shall-issue or may-issue CCW law? If so, do you utilize it? It's likely you do live in such a state given the fact that all but 4 states have laws to that effect. I'm wondering how many fellow/.ers utilize those laws.
Nice gun. My Glock 22 has a near 0% failure rate. I've only had one misfire in the handful of years I've owned it and the thousands of rounds I've put through it. I contribute that to faulty ammo though. It really wasn't the gun's fault. It's that damned PMC crap.
Now on the otherhand my Marlin 336SS has an extremely high failure rate. In the 3-4 years I've owned it I've had it jam up so bad I have to disassemble it to unjam it. In fact it's jammed up this very moment and I can't get the thing apart. I have to send it back to the factory for repair. That gun's failure rate is more than a little unacceptable. My Marlin 1894 hasn't ever had a problem though. Odd. It must be a manufaturing error in my 336.
You last sentence is a good one. I used the same arguement when I wrote to my state's senators last year when we were trying to get a CCW law passed (house passed it, Senate passed it with a veto-proof majority, the governess vetoed it. grrr). One of the good senators tried to introduce alternate language while the bill was in committee that would only allow the CCW permits to be issued for tasers and other non-lethal defensive weapons. Your arguement is the defense to that senator's language. The police don't trust the technology so why should I? Now let me expand on that. The police do use tasers. In fact they are becoming extremely common which is both a good and bad thing. The police however do not solely relay on tasers. They of course carry conventional firearms. Whenever you see cops enter a building with a non-lethal weapon to root out a suspect they never go in alone. They have at least one officer at their side with a conventional firearm drawn and ready to use. Stun guns don't always work. The clothing might be too thick. The probes might bounce off a large button, pin, cell phone, pocket protector, flask, bottle of jack, etc. It might hit the person's leather belt. It could hit in any number of places or ways that would render it useless. That also assumes the person firing it actually hits their target. Most consumer versions of stun guns are single-shot only. The user would have to reload to take a second shot. Since the range is usually limited to a about 15 feet (Taser International's product limitations) and since the minimum safe distance recommended by all personal safety classes is about 20 feet (see my previous post from tonight) the user wouldn't be able to reload the weapon, aim and fire again before the attacker was on them. Heck they'd already have to be in the person's buffer zone for the rounds to reach them period. The rounds aren't exactly the fastest in the world either so dodging them isn't impossible. Taser rounds aren't cheap either. How is a typical user supposed to practice with their gun when each round costs in the neighborhood of $20 or 7% of the cheapest Taser I found on the market (I just searched using Froogle for both the gun and the ammo). Practice makes perfect but apparently not if you can't afford to practice with your gun..50AE rounds aren't even that bad. Neither are 470 Nitro Express rounds. Sheesh. You'd think the rounds were gold encased.
Yeah, I think "smart" guns are for idiots and any law requiring their use must also be crafted by the same. Anyhow, I'm starting to rant. Nice Springfield though. I want a Kimber Gold Combat II.
How many seconds does it take for the gun to recognize that you're the authorized user? Any personal defense class will teach you to maintain as much distance between you and an attacker as possible. This maximizes the time you have to respond. This is taught not only in hand to hand self-defense classes but in personal defense with firearms training classes. A common distane given is 21 feet. That may seem like a lot but really it isn't. I attended a Senate hearing last Spring and met a man who had taken one of those courses. He too wondered about the minimum distance of 21 feet taught in the course. He measured out 21 feet on the floor in his home and had his wife time him as he "raced" across the floor. It took him less than 2 seconds. Did I mention that he was 76 years old and walked with a limp? 21 feet doesn't seem very far anymore, does it? If the gun takes anything more than an instant to recognize the authorized user than that person may very well end up dead. "'How come you didn't fire you gun?' asked the paramedic. 'It blue screened,' responded the dieing man."
How many authorized users can the gun recognize? Can these "smart" guns recognize more than one authorized user? I would want my significant other to have full access to my nightstand firearm if I was out of town or if the home invader had already injured me. Will I have to have a gun for each of us or can one work for both of us?
Will the "smart" gun recognize a user if their hand is wet? Perhaps they've already been injured by an attacker and their hand is now covered in their own blood. Will the sensors still work? What if the user stepped out of their shower, only to hear an attacker breaking glass downstairs in the kitchen to gain access to the house? I can think of any number of scenarios where a person's hand might not be recognizable by a "smart" gun's sensors. Defensive wounds are generally found on the hands and forearms. A slice in a palm from a knife will certainly alter one's handprint.
Can the gun recognize and authorize users based on situations? I happen to be a proponent of shall-issue concealed carry permit legislation. I've researched crime rates extensively. I heard arguements from all sides to compile my own person beliefs. I've also heard or read thousands of first and second-hand accounts of home invasions, assaults, rapes, and other heinous crimes. Many of these accounts were of individuals using firearms to defend themselves, or of individuals who would normally carry a firearm with them (CCW permit) but didn't on that fatal day, not to mention all other types of accounts. I can't begin to tell you how many accounts I read where a child was the one that saved the day, where the defended the parents, other siblings, or themselves from an attack such as a home invasion. I recall much of one account. The woman was a divorced teacher who lived with her son who was 12 or 13. The ex-husband was quite violent and had tried to kill her before. The mother and son moved away and started over in a new place with a new identity in secret. Eventually the husband got out of jail and came looking for the mother. I don't recall how he tracked them down but he did. He broke into the house at night, found the mother's room and was in the process of killing her when their son shot and killed him with the gun his mother kept in the house for protection. Now most parents wouldn't normally make the gun accessible to their children, and with the advent of "smart" guns one would assume that would also mean the child wouldn't be an authorized user. However some situations would have horribly tragic outcomes if the child couldn't access and use a gun to defend themselves or their family. Could this "smart" gun discern between such a life-threatening situation and that of a child wanting to show off the gun to his friends (possibly injuring one of them)? I won't go into the debate about kids and guns. My thoughts against careless parents have been expressed previously. The question remains thou
You know, my knee-jerk reaction to this particular situation is for her to tell the world who the source was that put that person's life (and that of her family's) in jeopardy. However I'm not so short-sighted to miss seeing the mountain through the fog. Might I remind you of a little something?
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
written by Evelyn Beatrice Hall under the pseudonym S[tephen] G. Tallentyre.
Do you want the rights to freedom of speech for yourself or your children? Then you must defend that right for all persons. You can't pick and choose who among us has that right. It's our collective right. We all have it. If one of us lose that right we all lose that right. Don't forget that the next time you want to hang a fellow citizen out to dry for a right you exercise everyday.
Many students don't realize this but as a student you do not have to give any university your SSN unless you are accepting financial aid from the university. Many universities make this quite clear to their staff on their internal Q&A websites. IIRC the Unv of Illinois was one such university that I found that data on. Also, IIRC, I believe the reasoning behind this can be found in FERPA. I could be mistaken but I believe that's the reason. I know I happened to come across it a couple years ago while doing research on FERPA at least.
It never ceases to amaze me how many places have my SSN. My insurance company was, up until just this week, using my SSN as my ID number. So did my last regular employer, a state university. So did my employer and educational institutional before that (another state university). If memory serves me correctly my telephone and gas/electric companies required I provide that information as well. Everyone has that information and not a damned one of them have any right to it. It's only their convienent way to identify me from everyone else. The system has been abused for far too long. I would love to see privacy legislation that made it unlawful to require that SSNs be provided except for in those cases where it is actually required such as financial reasons (employer, broker, CPA, etc) or medical reasons (insurance company and doctor but NOT pharmacists). There are probably other legit reasons that aren't popping into my head at the moment. This legislation should also prohibit these entities from abusing the SSN system by basing an individual's ID number on their SSN or some derivative. Both of these items would be required for decent legislation on this matter. Some would suggest the use of a national ID card. I'm rather opposed to that personally, but that's another topic for another discussion.
No shit. I wish I'd thought of it. Our power was out here for for 5 days or so thanks to an ice storm (still out for some folks). I'm thinking that this is an inexpensive type of advertising that works through disasters such as power outages. Helluva idea.
I couldn't have put it better myself. I'm sure all sons and daughters would like to make their parents proud by showing that they were raised well and can continue on with the family, especially once they come of an age where they realize just how expensive it is to raise a child and how much has to be sacrificed. Then they begin to kick themselves for some of the splurges they asked their parents for as children. My father is a mechanic (owned and ran his own garage) and my mother is a teacher. In hindsight I kick myself for asking for things like a Nintendo for X-mas now that I realize how much extra my father had to work to be able to afford that non-essential luxury. Granted I'd want my future children to have toys too but still that was a lot of money back then, especially with their income. I guess you realize these things in time. It's best not to forget the lesson either.
The worst class I ever had (took it more than once) was where the professor wrote his own book. I first took the class on edition 1. I had to drop it. I retook it the next Fall on edition 2. It still sucked and he made the class much harder. I dropped it again. Again, the next Fall, I took the class one last time. Again the edition had been bumped up to 3. The "book" was still spiral bound and broke open easily (bags and back packs were hell on that book). The book was even harder than the first two times. The 200 level intro to programming class (Java) had suddenly become a weed-out class. We were supposed to be doing GUIs by lesson 3 (this was in 1999 so it was with Swing IIRC), whereas edition 1 never touched on GUIs and edition 2's final project and a couple leading up to it were GUI projects. The people in the class went from the general populus that was sampling what the college had to offer and what the degree was going to be like to nerds. Nothing but diehard died in the wool nerds. It was not taught like a 200-level course. It was a campus joke.
In short the worst book I ever had for a class was one that the instructor actually wrote. Anyone else feel the same?
I think you're dead on about mature students. My first time in college, I went in with a full scholarship, and lost it after the first semester because of poor grades. I ended up with a 2.1 GPA and dropped out after 3 semesters suffering from pretty severe depression. I think a lot of this is due to immaturity, and the fact that I just wasn't ready. After 13 years of school in a highly structured environment, I think the sudden shift to the freedoms and unstructured environment of college were just too much for me. I had a lot of trouble motivating myself, I partied too much, and I got poor grades as a result. The whole thing was a downward spiral.
Damn. Boy does that ever sound familiar. I had 3 scholarships and I lost all of them too. I did horribly. I didn't know how to study. I didn't really get the importance of higher education. All I wanted to do was work at a campus job I liked (they really needed me which was a big plus for me) and play in the marching band. IIRC my GPA started with a decimal point. Yeah, I did a horrible job. I drug it out for 2.5 years though instead of only 3 semesters. Then I went into the work force. I just wasn't ready for college at that time either, no matter how I tested before entering it.
I've been planning on going back for a number of years now. First I needed to get out of debt and get some savings to live on for my first year or so (no outside work temptations to drag me away from my studies). I had just gotten out of debt when my employer laid me off. That was actually a good opportunity to go back to school. Unfortunately other things intervened. First I wrecked my motorcycle. That laid me up for a little while thanks to my back. Then my parents started building a new house. They needed my help badly. We had to get various stages completed so that the log home builder could come out and put up the house. Since then we've been working on adding the garage, wiring, plumbing, etc... I've been working on their house in various stages now for almost two years. Unfortunately the construction loan is up in March and the house HAS to be finished by then. That means I won't make it back to school this semester either. I will make it back to school I'm sure. Things just have to slow down a bit first.
My biggest concerns seem to be echoed by everyone here. I used to be excellent in math. I went to numerous competitions and I have dozens and dozens of medals for my efforts (minimal efforts, not to brag; I had a really good teacher set me on the right path). Unfortunately I can't remember jack now. I used to be able to do complex crap in my head. Now I can't even recall where to start. It's a good day when I can manage to add and subtract correctly. That's a big concern for me. I never was good at studying because in HS I never needed to. All I had to do was simply listen to the teacher or read the assigned reading in the book and I could pass any test they threw at me. I could whip out a 2-page book report on a book I'd never read in 5 minutes. I could whip out a lengthy research paper over night. Then I got to college and found out I couldn't do that anymore. I had to study to get by. Given all that I knew and my ability to learn, I just didn't know how to study. My failure was readily apparent early on. Ever take a 5 minute Chemistry final? No, I wasn't that good. It took 5 minutes to fill in all the bubbles as fast as I could. That should have been an indicator.
Well, enough of my ramblings. Best of luck on your degree. Hopefully I can get mine in the near future too.
My CPA told me the first year I had him do my returns that they insist all their customers send their returns certified at a minimum, return receipt preferred. He said they were always instructed to insist on that. A few friends of mine in college were taught a similar thing while getting business degrees (accounting classes). Think about it like this. You could pay the extra $2.30 and never need it, OR your return could get lost (it could get lost in any of a dozen hops or handling points between you and your nearest IRS office, OR it could get lost or accidentally destroyed during processing). If you can't prove you sent the letter before the deadline and you haven't filed an extension then you are truely SOL. The fines could easily be in the hundreds. Makes $2.30 seem rather trivial, doesn't it? I play the markets all the time. I try not to make a gamble I can't afford to lose when investing my money. I would gladly pay an extra bit of money if it would guarantee me I wouldn't lose hundreds later. That's just me of course.
I just remembered something my sister's account does to her. He guarantees his work. To do that he doesn't let his clients send in the returns themselves (I recall that my sister asked). He sends it in for them to ensure that it actually gets sent on time. He told her that it was the only way he could offer his guarantee.
This would be a perfect instance in which to use a BGP blacklist of known scamming sites to keep your unwitting users from getting caught up in the scam. nbar is a wonderful thing after all.
Well that's certainly a statement. Hopefully you don't run into someone who shares a similar philospophy when you make a mistake. Perhaps you forgot to signal and cut someone off. Maybe, if you're lucky, they'll honk and flip you off instead of running your ass off the road. You would be, after all, reaping what you sowed. Since you're condoning stalking, what would someone have to do for you to condone rape, or murder? You have some serious issues to deal with.
Liberation? I'm assume you're referring to Iraq. We didn't go into Iraq (either time) to liberate its people. We went into Iraq for the oil, plain and simple. Political asshats trying to redefine their intentions post-action say we're liberating the people. They also said Saddam was about to attack us, was developing nuclear weapons, and was a part of 9/11. All of that was BS. We're not acting as liberators. We're acting like oil-hungry greedy coporations who only give a damn about the bottomline. And what the hell is this about Kosovo and the tsunami relief efforts? Where the hell did that come from? You're simply blind, period.
I bought a 1U a while back through 8anet. It's a SuperMicro 6013. Not a bad box at all. I didn't even want to think about trying to find all the specialty pieces for the box, not to mention trying to make them all fit. When it comes to anything smaller than a desktop (dementionally) I'll buy it pre-built.;-)
$0.37?! vettemph, are you insane? First of all the average US Federal Tax Return will be at least 4 pages long. Once you include a check you're pushing if not exceeding 2 ounces. $0.37 only covers 1oz. Secondly if you use the pre-addressed envelope the IRS includes in your tax mailing (if you get one) it counted as either a "large envelope" or an "odd shaped" envelope by the USPS. That's $0.49 for the first ounce. A 2oz mailing for First-Class mail will cost you $0.60. You would be a complete idiot to not send it Certified, which costs and additional $2.30. Any CPA will tell you to ask for a Return Receipt as well, which will cost you an additional $1.75. What does all this add up to?
First-Class Mail $0.60
Certified $2.30
Return Receipt $1.75
Total Cost: $4.65
That's $4.65 IF your mailing weighs 2oz or less. It's $0.83 for 3oz of First-Class mail, bringing the total to $4.88.
Let's assume that for whatever reason you want to get your package to the IRS faster than standard First-Class mail provides (maybe you want your return ASAP). Priority mail costs $3.85 up to 16oz. 17oz is jumps to $3.95.
What does all this mean? It means that only a fool would attempt to send their US Federal Tax Returns with $0.37. The good news is that your mailing expenses for processing your return (including paying a CPA to do it and the costs to mail it in) are tax deductable. What? You didn't keep those receipts? Shame on you.
When we stoop to the lowest levels of the terrorists we become nothing more than terrorists ourselves. We will lose what little respect the international community has left for us. We'll go from being bullied to being the bully. Is that really the America you want portraited to the rest of the world? Is that a legacy you want to leave to your children? If so then perhaps you should move to China. I imagine you'd fit right in.
You know, it's one thing to berate a guy for something he did in the course of his career (one of them). It's an entirely different thing to terrorize him and his family. I forget the specifics of Bono's stalking case but that's always the result (or one of them). There's never a justification for that. I don't care how much he sold out his constituency. Even he didn't deserve that.
don't do much in the way of reviewing. I buy a helluva lot of gear though. I find the best deals at Pricewatch and Froogle, of course and I check new resellers at ResellerRatings.com. I also have a handful of companies I buy from regularly. For example I buy a lot of gear from Newegg, and I do mean a lot. I'll pay a few bucks extra (they usually aren't the cheapest around but they are usually pretty close) just to deal with a company I'm familiar with and who I know ships pretty quickly. I buy from:
There are a lot more I'm sure but I can't think of all of them off the top of my head. Oh, I have bought from Monarch Computers also. There are some companies I won't buy from eve again. The main one that comes to mind is Computer Giants. Those folks tried to scam me once on a Maxtor hard drive that went DOA in the first couple of days of testing. Like all the people posting complaints about them on ResellerRatings they tried to con me into paying return shipping to send the DOA drive back. They also said I'd have to pay one of their people to test the drive and confirm it was DOA. Otherwise I'd have to pay to have it sent back to me. Most people find that the drives are OEM or used and that they are selling them as new retail. Yeah, they're a bunch of asshats. That's why merchant review sites are so essential to buying on the Internet. You can't walk into an Internet store, get in a manager's face, and demand your money back for the lemon they sold you when you buy something online. You have to rely on other people's experiences to weed out the crooks. Fortunately for me Maxtor was exceptionally nice about the whole thing and took care of replacing out DOA drive with a brand new replacement. Nice folks @ Maxtor.
Anyhow, I don't always buy the lowest price on Pricewatch and Froogle. I'll buy from a company I know it's going to try and screw me even if I have to pay a little more. I always check eBay before placing an order too. Take for example one of my recent eBay purchases. I priced rack-mount patch cable organizer (wire routing gear) on Froogle. I found a decent model by APC for $25/each. I just happened to search ebay before buying and low and hehold I found Leviton cable organizers for $4.99/each. Each! Ha! Needless to say I bought 4 instead of 1. They are also built extremely well. Always check eBay before buying something online. You may find it for half the price (or less!).
Even worse, assume for a moment that a disgruntled ex-husband calls up Hotmail, claims that user X is infringing on his copyrights for ficticious product X, and demands to have the contact information of that user (his ex-wife). He then uses that contact info (probably her current ISP's email account) to again allege a copyright violation and demand her contact and billing information. Now he has her credit card info and mailing address. He goes to the address, kills her, and takes their child (that the mother had full custody of and a protection order against the father). Or take the same scenario but this time apply it to a female celebrity and her website. This time use a mentally unbalanced stalker instead of a disgruntled ex-husband. Perhaps the celebrity sent the bills to her secret, private (unpublicized so the paparazzi don't find it) condo in Montana. Of course since noone knows about the condo but her family and closest friends the security will probably be much more lax or even non-existent. Opps. Now this mentally unbalanced stalker has her private mailing address. How many female celebrities have been confronted, assaulted or killed by their deranged stalkers? Lets count just who we can easily recall:
Sheryl Crow - confronted by Ambrose Kappos
Jacqueline Kennedy-Onassis - confronted
Gwyneth Paltrow - confronted by Ron Galella
Rebecca Schaeffer - MURDERED by Robert Bardo
Barbara Mandrell - confronted by Edwin John Carlson
Madonna - confronted by Robert Hoskins who was ultimately shot (not killed by one of her bodyguards.
Olivia Newton John - confronted by Michael Perry who was found camping behind her house. He wasn't charged though and was sent home to his family, which he ultimately MURDERED.
Jodie Foster and Ronald Reagan - John Hinckley Jr. shot President Reagan to impress Jodi Fostter, whom he was stalking.
This doesn't only happen to female celebs. It happens to male ones too:
John Lennon - MURDERED by Mark David Chapman
Michael J. Fox - confronted by Tina Ledbetter
Scott Bakula - confronted by Tina Ledbetter
Steven Spielberg - confronted by Jonathan Norman
David Letterman
Rebecca Schaeffer, Theresa Saldana, Cher, Olivia Newton-John, Sheena Easton, Barbara Mandrell, Maddona, Michael Jackson, Michael J. Fox, Justine Bateman, Sarah McGlocklin, Belinda Carlisle, David Bowie, Whitney Houston, Vanessa Williams, Sharon Gless, Brad Pitt, Monica Sales, Nicole Kidman. Jeri Ryan, Meg Ryan, Mel Gibson, Anne Murray, Sonny Bono and even Steven Spielberg are just a few of the celebrities who have been stalked.
A law change to allow anyone to allege copyright infringement to gain personal data is absurd and will be a boon to stalkers everywhere.
Slashdot Mirror
Gun control laws don't work so there's no point discussing them.
Guns can be reliable. They can also fail miserably. I do an excellent job maintaining my guns and ammo. Still I've experienced many failures. Few however were the fault of the gun (the 336 and SKS problem certainly are though). Adding electronics to a gun won't make it more reliable though. It will undoubtedly make it more likely to fail. Suddenly we'll be faced with the prospect of guns that have to be serviced every 200 shots, or guns that only have a shelf-life of 5 years. That's absurd. I made a lot of other points about the "smart" gun in other threads. Check my profile if you want to read them. I think I asked some interesting questions though. With blood on your hand with the "smart" gun still recognize you, for example?
BTW, I forgot to ask, since you have a compact firearm and given the fact that they are usually purchased for a specific reason, do you live in a state with a shall-issue or may-issue CCW law? If so, do you utilize it? It's likely you do live in such a state given the fact that all but 4 states have laws to that effect. I'm wondering how many fellow /.ers utilize those laws.
Now on the otherhand my Marlin 336SS has an extremely high failure rate. In the 3-4 years I've owned it I've had it jam up so bad I have to disassemble it to unjam it. In fact it's jammed up this very moment and I can't get the thing apart. I have to send it back to the factory for repair. That gun's failure rate is more than a little unacceptable. My Marlin 1894 hasn't ever had a problem though. Odd. It must be a manufaturing error in my 336.
You last sentence is a good one. I used the same arguement when I wrote to my state's senators last year when we were trying to get a CCW law passed (house passed it, Senate passed it with a veto-proof majority, the governess vetoed it. grrr). One of the good senators tried to introduce alternate language while the bill was in committee that would only allow the CCW permits to be issued for tasers and other non-lethal defensive weapons. Your arguement is the defense to that senator's language. The police don't trust the technology so why should I? Now let me expand on that. The police do use tasers. In fact they are becoming extremely common which is both a good and bad thing. The police however do not solely relay on tasers. They of course carry conventional firearms. Whenever you see cops enter a building with a non-lethal weapon to root out a suspect they never go in alone. They have at least one officer at their side with a conventional firearm drawn and ready to use. Stun guns don't always work. The clothing might be too thick. The probes might bounce off a large button, pin, cell phone, pocket protector, flask, bottle of jack, etc. It might hit the person's leather belt. It could hit in any number of places or ways that would render it useless. That also assumes the person firing it actually hits their target. Most consumer versions of stun guns are single-shot only. The user would have to reload to take a second shot. Since the range is usually limited to a about 15 feet (Taser International's product limitations) and since the minimum safe distance recommended by all personal safety classes is about 20 feet (see my previous post from tonight) the user wouldn't be able to reload the weapon, aim and fire again before the attacker was on them. Heck they'd already have to be in the person's buffer zone for the rounds to reach them period. The rounds aren't exactly the fastest in the world either so dodging them isn't impossible. Taser rounds aren't cheap either. How is a typical user supposed to practice with their gun when each round costs in the neighborhood of $20 or 7% of the cheapest Taser I found on the market (I just searched using Froogle for both the gun and the ammo). Practice makes perfect but apparently not if you can't afford to practice with your gun. .50AE rounds aren't even that bad. Neither are 470 Nitro Express rounds. Sheesh. You'd think the rounds were gold encased.
Yeah, I think "smart" guns are for idiots and any law requiring their use must also be crafted by the same. Anyhow, I'm starting to rant. Nice Springfield though. I want a Kimber Gold Combat II.
How many authorized users can the gun recognize? Can these "smart" guns recognize more than one authorized user? I would want my significant other to have full access to my nightstand firearm if I was out of town or if the home invader had already injured me. Will I have to have a gun for each of us or can one work for both of us?
Will the "smart" gun recognize a user if their hand is wet? Perhaps they've already been injured by an attacker and their hand is now covered in their own blood. Will the sensors still work? What if the user stepped out of their shower, only to hear an attacker breaking glass downstairs in the kitchen to gain access to the house? I can think of any number of scenarios where a person's hand might not be recognizable by a "smart" gun's sensors. Defensive wounds are generally found on the hands and forearms. A slice in a palm from a knife will certainly alter one's handprint.
Can the gun recognize and authorize users based on situations? I happen to be a proponent of shall-issue concealed carry permit legislation. I've researched crime rates extensively. I heard arguements from all sides to compile my own person beliefs. I've also heard or read thousands of first and second-hand accounts of home invasions, assaults, rapes, and other heinous crimes. Many of these accounts were of individuals using firearms to defend themselves, or of individuals who would normally carry a firearm with them (CCW permit) but didn't on that fatal day, not to mention all other types of accounts. I can't begin to tell you how many accounts I read where a child was the one that saved the day, where the defended the parents, other siblings, or themselves from an attack such as a home invasion. I recall much of one account. The woman was a divorced teacher who lived with her son who was 12 or 13. The ex-husband was quite violent and had tried to kill her before. The mother and son moved away and started over in a new place with a new identity in secret. Eventually the husband got out of jail and came looking for the mother. I don't recall how he tracked them down but he did. He broke into the house at night, found the mother's room and was in the process of killing her when their son shot and killed him with the gun his mother kept in the house for protection. Now most parents wouldn't normally make the gun accessible to their children, and with the advent of "smart" guns one would assume that would also mean the child wouldn't be an authorized user. However some situations would have horribly tragic outcomes if the child couldn't access and use a gun to defend themselves or their family. Could this "smart" gun discern between such a life-threatening situation and that of a child wanting to show off the gun to his friends (possibly injuring one of them)? I won't go into the debate about kids and guns. My thoughts against careless parents have been expressed previously. The question remains thou
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
written by Evelyn Beatrice Hall under the pseudonym S[tephen] G. Tallentyre.
Do you want the rights to freedom of speech for yourself or your children? Then you must defend that right for all persons. You can't pick and choose who among us has that right. It's our collective right. We all have it. If one of us lose that right we all lose that right. Don't forget that the next time you want to hang a fellow citizen out to dry for a right you exercise everyday.
He was knowingly in posession of stolen property. That's a crime in case you weren't aware.
It never ceases to amaze me how many places have my SSN. My insurance company was, up until just this week, using my SSN as my ID number. So did my last regular employer, a state university. So did my employer and educational institutional before that (another state university). If memory serves me correctly my telephone and gas/electric companies required I provide that information as well. Everyone has that information and not a damned one of them have any right to it. It's only their convienent way to identify me from everyone else. The system has been abused for far too long. I would love to see privacy legislation that made it unlawful to require that SSNs be provided except for in those cases where it is actually required such as financial reasons (employer, broker, CPA, etc) or medical reasons (insurance company and doctor but NOT pharmacists). There are probably other legit reasons that aren't popping into my head at the moment. This legislation should also prohibit these entities from abusing the SSN system by basing an individual's ID number on their SSN or some derivative. Both of these items would be required for decent legislation on this matter. Some would suggest the use of a national ID card. I'm rather opposed to that personally, but that's another topic for another discussion.
I'm working on that. It's slow going but it will eventually happen.
No shit. I wish I'd thought of it. Our power was out here for for 5 days or so thanks to an ice storm (still out for some folks). I'm thinking that this is an inexpensive type of advertising that works through disasters such as power outages. Helluva idea.
I couldn't have put it better myself. I'm sure all sons and daughters would like to make their parents proud by showing that they were raised well and can continue on with the family, especially once they come of an age where they realize just how expensive it is to raise a child and how much has to be sacrificed. Then they begin to kick themselves for some of the splurges they asked their parents for as children. My father is a mechanic (owned and ran his own garage) and my mother is a teacher. In hindsight I kick myself for asking for things like a Nintendo for X-mas now that I realize how much extra my father had to work to be able to afford that non-essential luxury. Granted I'd want my future children to have toys too but still that was a lot of money back then, especially with their income. I guess you realize these things in time. It's best not to forget the lesson either.
In short the worst book I ever had for a class was one that the instructor actually wrote. Anyone else feel the same?
Don't you mean to say that any self-respecting nerd doesn't own a copy of PowerPoint? Personally I'd give the OpenOffice variant a try.
Damn. Boy does that ever sound familiar. I had 3 scholarships and I lost all of them too. I did horribly. I didn't know how to study. I didn't really get the importance of higher education. All I wanted to do was work at a campus job I liked (they really needed me which was a big plus for me) and play in the marching band. IIRC my GPA started with a decimal point. Yeah, I did a horrible job. I drug it out for 2.5 years though instead of only 3 semesters. Then I went into the work force. I just wasn't ready for college at that time either, no matter how I tested before entering it.
I've been planning on going back for a number of years now. First I needed to get out of debt and get some savings to live on for my first year or so (no outside work temptations to drag me away from my studies). I had just gotten out of debt when my employer laid me off. That was actually a good opportunity to go back to school. Unfortunately other things intervened. First I wrecked my motorcycle. That laid me up for a little while thanks to my back. Then my parents started building a new house. They needed my help badly. We had to get various stages completed so that the log home builder could come out and put up the house. Since then we've been working on adding the garage, wiring, plumbing, etc... I've been working on their house in various stages now for almost two years. Unfortunately the construction loan is up in March and the house HAS to be finished by then. That means I won't make it back to school this semester either. I will make it back to school I'm sure. Things just have to slow down a bit first.
My biggest concerns seem to be echoed by everyone here. I used to be excellent in math. I went to numerous competitions and I have dozens and dozens of medals for my efforts (minimal efforts, not to brag; I had a really good teacher set me on the right path). Unfortunately I can't remember jack now. I used to be able to do complex crap in my head. Now I can't even recall where to start. It's a good day when I can manage to add and subtract correctly. That's a big concern for me. I never was good at studying because in HS I never needed to. All I had to do was simply listen to the teacher or read the assigned reading in the book and I could pass any test they threw at me. I could whip out a 2-page book report on a book I'd never read in 5 minutes. I could whip out a lengthy research paper over night. Then I got to college and found out I couldn't do that anymore. I had to study to get by. Given all that I knew and my ability to learn, I just didn't know how to study. My failure was readily apparent early on. Ever take a 5 minute Chemistry final? No, I wasn't that good. It took 5 minutes to fill in all the bubbles as fast as I could. That should have been an indicator.
Well, enough of my ramblings. Best of luck on your degree. Hopefully I can get mine in the near future too.
I just remembered something my sister's account does to her. He guarantees his work. To do that he doesn't let his clients send in the returns themselves (I recall that my sister asked). He sends it in for them to ensure that it actually gets sent on time. He told her that it was the only way he could offer his guarantee.
Do you realize how pathetic you sound? You wouldn't happen to be related to Ann Coulter, would you? You're arguements sound much the same.
Personally I've found Java to be the hardest common language for anyone to use. C was so much easier IMHO.
This would be a perfect instance in which to use a BGP blacklist of known scamming sites to keep your unwitting users from getting caught up in the scam. nbar is a wonderful thing after all.
Well that's certainly a statement. Hopefully you don't run into someone who shares a similar philospophy when you make a mistake. Perhaps you forgot to signal and cut someone off. Maybe, if you're lucky, they'll honk and flip you off instead of running your ass off the road. You would be, after all, reaping what you sowed. Since you're condoning stalking, what would someone have to do for you to condone rape, or murder? You have some serious issues to deal with.
Liberation? I'm assume you're referring to Iraq. We didn't go into Iraq (either time) to liberate its people. We went into Iraq for the oil, plain and simple. Political asshats trying to redefine their intentions post-action say we're liberating the people. They also said Saddam was about to attack us, was developing nuclear weapons, and was a part of 9/11. All of that was BS. We're not acting as liberators. We're acting like oil-hungry greedy coporations who only give a damn about the bottomline. And what the hell is this about Kosovo and the tsunami relief efforts? Where the hell did that come from? You're simply blind, period.
I bought a 1U a while back through 8anet. It's a SuperMicro 6013. Not a bad box at all. I didn't even want to think about trying to find all the specialty pieces for the box, not to mention trying to make them all fit. When it comes to anything smaller than a desktop (dementionally) I'll buy it pre-built. ;-)
First-Class Mail $0.60
Certified $2.30
Return Receipt $1.75
Total Cost: $4.65
That's $4.65 IF your mailing weighs 2oz or less. It's $0.83 for 3oz of First-Class mail, bringing the total to $4.88.
Let's assume that for whatever reason you want to get your package to the IRS faster than standard First-Class mail provides (maybe you want your return ASAP). Priority mail costs $3.85 up to 16oz. 17oz is jumps to $3.95.
What does all this mean? It means that only a fool would attempt to send their US Federal Tax Returns with $0.37. The good news is that your mailing expenses for processing your return (including paying a CPA to do it and the costs to mail it in) are tax deductable. What? You didn't keep those receipts? Shame on you.
When we stoop to the lowest levels of the terrorists we become nothing more than terrorists ourselves. We will lose what little respect the international community has left for us. We'll go from being bullied to being the bully. Is that really the America you want portraited to the rest of the world? Is that a legacy you want to leave to your children? If so then perhaps you should move to China. I imagine you'd fit right in.
You know, it's one thing to berate a guy for something he did in the course of his career (one of them). It's an entirely different thing to terrorize him and his family. I forget the specifics of Bono's stalking case but that's always the result (or one of them). There's never a justification for that. I don't care how much he sold out his constituency. Even he didn't deserve that.
Newegg
8anet, also known as AcmeMicro
Racks And Stands
Sybercom
TechOnWeb
Amazon (I buy a lot through Amazon because I get a referal kickback for links from my website which is nice)
AccuPC
There are a lot more I'm sure but I can't think of all of them off the top of my head. Oh, I have bought from Monarch Computers also. There are some companies I won't buy from eve again. The main one that comes to mind is Computer Giants. Those folks tried to scam me once on a Maxtor hard drive that went DOA in the first couple of days of testing. Like all the people posting complaints about them on ResellerRatings they tried to con me into paying return shipping to send the DOA drive back. They also said I'd have to pay one of their people to test the drive and confirm it was DOA. Otherwise I'd have to pay to have it sent back to me. Most people find that the drives are OEM or used and that they are selling them as new retail. Yeah, they're a bunch of asshats. That's why merchant review sites are so essential to buying on the Internet. You can't walk into an Internet store, get in a manager's face, and demand your money back for the lemon they sold you when you buy something online. You have to rely on other people's experiences to weed out the crooks. Fortunately for me Maxtor was exceptionally nice about the whole thing and took care of replacing out DOA drive with a brand new replacement. Nice folks @ Maxtor.
Anyhow, I don't always buy the lowest price on Pricewatch and Froogle. I'll buy from a company I know it's going to try and screw me even if I have to pay a little more. I always check eBay before placing an order too. Take for example one of my recent eBay purchases. I priced rack-mount patch cable organizer (wire routing gear) on Froogle. I found a decent model by APC for $25/each. I just happened to search ebay before buying and low and hehold I found Leviton cable organizers for $4.99/each. Each! Ha! Needless to say I bought 4 instead of 1. They are also built extremely well. Always check eBay before buying something online. You may find it for half the price (or less!).
Sheryl Crow - confronted by Ambrose Kappos
Jacqueline Kennedy-Onassis - confronted
Gwyneth Paltrow - confronted by Ron Galella
Rebecca Schaeffer - MURDERED by Robert Bardo
Barbara Mandrell - confronted by Edwin John Carlson
Madonna - confronted by Robert Hoskins who was ultimately shot (not killed by one of her bodyguards.
Olivia Newton John - confronted by Michael Perry who was found camping behind her house. He wasn't charged though and was sent home to his family, which he ultimately MURDERED.
Jodie Foster and Ronald Reagan - John Hinckley Jr. shot President Reagan to impress Jodi Fostter, whom he was stalking.
This doesn't only happen to female celebs. It happens to male ones too:
John Lennon - MURDERED by Mark David Chapman
Michael J. Fox - confronted by Tina Ledbetter
Scott Bakula - confronted by Tina Ledbetter
Steven Spielberg - confronted by Jonathan Norman
David Letterman
Rebecca Schaeffer, Theresa Saldana, Cher, Olivia Newton-John, Sheena Easton, Barbara Mandrell, Maddona, Michael Jackson, Michael J. Fox, Justine Bateman, Sarah McGlocklin, Belinda Carlisle, David Bowie, Whitney Houston, Vanessa Williams, Sharon Gless, Brad Pitt, Monica Sales, Nicole Kidman. Jeri Ryan, Meg Ryan, Mel Gibson, Anne Murray, Sonny Bono and even Steven Spielberg are just a few of the celebrities who have been stalked.
A law change to allow anyone to allege copyright infringement to gain personal data is absurd and will be a boon to stalkers everywhere.