What? How the hell do you get busted for war driving? What was he doing, sitting in parking lots of government agencies with a big ass antenna on the roof of his car?
When the rules are fucked up, you don't play by the rules.
Damn straight. Cops know what's up when they show up to your house. They're human beings just like you and me, and they deal with the scum of the earth every day. Broken window, known criminal lying dead in your house, distraught wife & kids, upset husband. They know the asshole broke into your home. They may even know that you placed the knife in his hand to cover your ass. But you know what? They're not going to say a damn thing about it. The police report will show that you simply defended yourself.
Why? Like I said, they deal with these lowlifes every day. They know good and well that the scumbag was there to rob or kill you and that he deserved what he got. Hell, they probably know the guy's name - 9 times out of 10 he's been in trouble before. They're not going to give anyone any ammunition to come after you, even if that means overlooking some details.
Are those "cops" of yours Taliban or members of the Ba'hat party?
Obviously, you're one of those clowns who doesn't believe I have the right to protect my home. That I should be arrested and thrown in jail for harming someone who has broken into my home and woken me from a deep sleep at 3 in the morning, and whom I, half asleep, scared for my life and full of adrenaline, find in a dark living room with absolutely no idea what his intentions are.
The next time some cretin breaks into your house and proceeds to take your belongings (or worse), please, by all means, just ask him politely to leave. I'm sure he will apologize and do so.
You're allowed to shoot someone for breaking in to your house, even without being threatend.
Not in most states you aren't. They can break into your home and if they don't have a weapon, you can't harm them. I shit you not. The family can come back and sue you: "Oh, he was just drunk, or stoned, or lost and confused. He didn't know where he was. He thought he was in his own house, and then the defendent shot him!" And if the police report doesn't show that the guy had a weapon, you're SOL.
This is why most cops will tell you: Shoot the bastard, and if he doesn't have a weapon, grab a knife or whatever from your kitchen and put it in his hand. If he crawls out of your house after you shoot him, drag him back in.
1. Garnish your wages (they get taken right out of your paycheck)
2. Place a lien on any real estate you own.
It's easy enough to get around this: Don't own real estate, or don't put it in your name, and don't have a job. Or, better yet, simply make sure the people going after you don't have your social security number. You can move from job to job, or hide out at a single job, and it can take them years to find you - if ever.
I should know. I have a judgement against some asshat who ran me off the road, but it's completely worthless to me. He doesn't own real estate and who in the hell knows where the guy works. I don't have his social so I can't track him down that way. I could hire a PI, but who knows whether that would get results, and it would cost a nice chunk of change.
Furthermore, any company who doesn't want to distibute plans for use with these printers, just won't
So? People like me will design our own printers and give the plans away for free. Like the slick corner desk I just designed and am building: When I'm done, I'll put the plans on my web site for others to use. I don't care if someone uses my plans to build themselves a desk. It's not costing me anything, except maybe a little bandwidth when they download the plans, but who cares about such things?
The big problem with hard buttons in a universal remote control are the special functions. The text labeling never suffices, and it's a pain to remember that a certain button does something totally unrelated to it's label for device x.
Ideally, you would have hard buttons with a big LCD in the background (or tiny LCDs embedded in each button). That way, when you switched devices, the text labeling would change as well.
I personally prefer my 8" AMX touchpanel & hardwired IR. Works perfectly every time, and the AMX master can sense the power status of my various devices for use in macros. 10x better than a Pronto.
To me, that is solicitation initiated from their side, and thus seems to fall very close to the entrapment of the above statement.
It does fall very close, but not quite. Entrapment is talking you into doing something you wouldn't otherwise do. If the undercover cop-hooker approaches you with, "Hey, want to have some fun?", that's not entrapment. Entrapment would be harassing you about it or otherwise talking you into it after you've said no several times. Like, "Oh, come on. Look, I'll give it to you for half price. No? You sure? How about $20? $10, make it $10, then?" yadda yadda...
John DeLorean was let off his cocaine charges because of entrapment. The officers involved in the case had a busted drug trafficker working for them who continually phoned DeLorean, harassed him, and threatened him and his family with harm if he didn't put up the money and go through with the deal. (The idea was John would put up $x money, the guy would buy the drugs and sell them, and give John $x+$y to save his company) THAT is entrapment. Simple solicitation is not.
The printer that we used used big chunks of colored wax which were melted and then used to print onto plain paper.
That's a Tektronix Phaser. Nice printers. But the prints don't last. I left several full page color prints in my car one day and they melted together. Also, you can scrape the wax right off of a finished print.
Not very practical in the real world, unfortunately.
The plural pronouns have also been put to use as pronouns of indefinite number to refer to singular nouns that stand for many persons
And:
The use of they, their, them, and themselves as pronouns of indefinite gender and indefinite number is well established in speech and writing
Note "singular nouns that stand for many persons" and "pronouns of indefinite gender and indefinite number". Not one. Many and indefinite. In other words, if you're talking about multiple people, "they" is acceptable. It isn't acceptable when you're referencing a single individual.
To use the term in the context we're discussing is completely wrong:
"...unless the administrator keeps detailed logs of everybody's account use - which is not required by law - they may well not know who was swapping files."
The word "they" would only be appropriate if we were discussing multiple people, as in this modified quote:
"...unless the administration keeps detailed logs of everybody's account use - which is not required by law - they may well not know who was swapping files."
You can try arguing with me, but arguing with Shakespeare about correct usage seems pretty hopeless.
Nowhere did Shakespeare use a plural to reference a single. In fact, only one of the quotes above did so:
"and every one to rest themselves betake" - every one = multiple people "I would have everybody marry if they can do it properly" - everybody = multiple people "it is too hideous for anyone in their senses to buy" - anyone refers to any number of people "'tis meet that some more audience than a mother, since nature makes them partial, should o'erhear the speech" - some = multiple people "a person can't help their birth" - This one is borderline, if not totally incorrect. "A person" is obviously a single person, so this should have been "can't help his birth." "no man goes to battle to be killed. -- But they do get killed" - this could seem borderline, but Shaw obviously was referring to multiples. "No man goes to battle to be killed. But they (men) do get killed."
Millions sit in our prisons today for the crime of smoking a plant in the privacy of their own home.
They don't have to imprison 65 million. They can, however, imprison several million to prove their point. Do you want to spend five years in prison and lose everything you own?
Actually, 'they' is perfectly acceptable when referring to people of unknown gender in a sentence and doesn't carry the predisposition that the person being talked about is male.
I can see you've never taken an English course. "They" is plural and is only acceptable when referring to multiple unknown people:
"We met some Eskimos. They were very friendly."
It is NOT appropriate when referring to one person:
"I heard a story about an Eskimo. Apparently, they purchased a number of sled dogs."
And before you start saying, yes but the criminals have guns, no they don't. Gun crime is extremely rare here.
You're either ignorant, a liar or both. A quick Google on "gun crime in europe" reveals the truth on the matter. Case in point:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/gun/Story/0,2763,87181 9, 00.html Germany Armed hostage-takings and robberies are relatively commonplace. In 2001, there were 11,270 gun-related offences. But gun crime is coming down sharply. The 2001 figure was a fall of almost 10% on the previous year.
France Violent crimes, particularly armed robbery, increased by 9.8% in 2001, the last year for which figures are available, writes Jon Henley in Paris. Violence and insecurity became by far the most important issue in last year's tumultuous elections.
Spain Gun crime has been relatively infrequent in Spain, writes Giles Tremlett in Madrid.
However, alliances between Colombian cocaine cartels and the traditional smuggling fraternity of Galicia, north-west Spain, have brought a big increase in shootings.
Italy The anxiety caused by violent crime was one of the factors that contributed to the election of Silvio Berlusconi's centre right government in 2001, writes Philip Willan in Rome.
I'm sorry to shock you out of your bullshit "gun control works" life. Large numbers of criminals most certainly have guns in Europe, and your citizens are unable to legally defend themselves.
You can certainly refuse to take 1.4x10^5 pennies. A few years back a city courthouse refused to take approximately $200 when a man attempted to pay his fine with pennies.
A few years back a local man tried to pay his several hundred dollar debt at the local courthouse as well. He paid with normal money, but came up like 20 cents short after scavenging all that he could. He handed over a US postage stamp and the clerk refused to take it.
This was the last day he was allowed to pay his fine so warrants were put out for his arrest and the fine substantially increased. He sued, and won. Apparently, postage stamps are legal tender and must be accepted - at least by this particular government organization.
Sorry, you're wrong. Phones have the most current going through them on an incoming ring. I used to strip the wires with my teeth all the time. Nothing more than mild tingling, until an incoming call came in at the wrong time once. OUCH! Hurt like hell.
I don't know if they make it, but I wish I could have found double-jacketed speaker wire -- ie, two jacketed pairs in a single jacket that could be stripped back near the end of a run for seperate speakers. Uhm, so, this is really easy to find, I've got a thousand feet of it in my walls. I just bought "2 pair speaker wire". Yellow jacket around the outside, and red, black, white and some other color (it's been 3 years since I installed it) jackets on the inside.
Slashdot Mirror
What? How the hell do you get busted for war driving? What was he doing, sitting in parking lots of government agencies with a big ass antenna on the roof of his car?
The AC said:
When the rules are fucked up, you don't play by the rules.
Damn straight. Cops know what's up when they show up to your house. They're human beings just like you and me, and they deal with the scum of the earth every day. Broken window, known criminal lying dead in your house, distraught wife & kids, upset husband. They know the asshole broke into your home. They may even know that you placed the knife in his hand to cover your ass. But you know what? They're not going to say a damn thing about it. The police report will show that you simply defended yourself.
Why? Like I said, they deal with these lowlifes every day. They know good and well that the scumbag was there to rob or kill you and that he deserved what he got. Hell, they probably know the guy's name - 9 times out of 10 he's been in trouble before. They're not going to give anyone any ammunition to come after you, even if that means overlooking some details.
Are those "cops" of yours Taliban or members of the Ba'hat party?
Obviously, you're one of those clowns who doesn't believe I have the right to protect my home. That I should be arrested and thrown in jail for harming someone who has broken into my home and woken me from a deep sleep at 3 in the morning, and whom I, half asleep, scared for my life and full of adrenaline, find in a dark living room with absolutely no idea what his intentions are.
The next time some cretin breaks into your house and proceeds to take your belongings (or worse), please, by all means, just ask him politely to leave. I'm sure he will apologize and do so.
You're allowed to shoot someone for breaking in to your house, even without being threatend.
Not in most states you aren't. They can break into your home and if they don't have a weapon, you can't harm them. I shit you not. The family can come back and sue you: "Oh, he was just drunk, or stoned, or lost and confused. He didn't know where he was. He thought he was in his own house, and then the defendent shot him!" And if the police report doesn't show that the guy had a weapon, you're SOL.
This is why most cops will tell you: Shoot the bastard, and if he doesn't have a weapon, grab a knife or whatever from your kitchen and put it in his hand. If he crawls out of your house after you shoot him, drag him back in.
Anyone with a judgement against you can:
1. Garnish your wages (they get taken right out of your paycheck)
2. Place a lien on any real estate you own.
It's easy enough to get around this: Don't own real estate, or don't put it in your name, and don't have a job. Or, better yet, simply make sure the people going after you don't have your social security number. You can move from job to job, or hide out at a single job, and it can take them years to find you - if ever.
I should know. I have a judgement against some asshat who ran me off the road, but it's completely worthless to me. He doesn't own real estate and who in the hell knows where the guy works. I don't have his social so I can't track him down that way. I could hire a PI, but who knows whether that would get results, and it would cost a nice chunk of change.
Furthermore, any company who doesn't want to distibute plans for use with these printers, just won't
So? People like me will design our own printers and give the plans away for free. Like the slick corner desk I just designed and am building: When I'm done, I'll put the plans on my web site for others to use. I don't care if someone uses my plans to build themselves a desk. It's not costing me anything, except maybe a little bandwidth when they download the plans, but who cares about such things?
X-10 is a child's toy. Real men use AMX or Crestron. Try Lutron Radiora for wireless lighting controls. You can integrate anything with these systems.
The big problem with hard buttons in a universal remote control are the special functions. The text labeling never suffices, and it's a pain to remember that a certain button does something totally unrelated to it's label for device x.
Ideally, you would have hard buttons with a big LCD in the background (or tiny LCDs embedded in each button). That way, when you switched devices, the text labeling would change as well.
I personally prefer my 8" AMX touchpanel & hardwired IR. Works perfectly every time, and the AMX master can sense the power status of my various devices for use in macros. 10x better than a Pronto.
To me, that is solicitation initiated from their side, and thus seems to fall very close to the entrapment of the above statement.
It does fall very close, but not quite. Entrapment is talking you into doing something you wouldn't otherwise do. If the undercover cop-hooker approaches you with, "Hey, want to have some fun?", that's not entrapment. Entrapment would be harassing you about it or otherwise talking you into it after you've said no several times. Like, "Oh, come on. Look, I'll give it to you for half price. No? You sure? How about $20? $10, make it $10, then?" yadda yadda...
John DeLorean was let off his cocaine charges because of entrapment. The officers involved in the case had a busted drug trafficker working for them who continually phoned DeLorean, harassed him, and threatened him and his family with harm if he didn't put up the money and go through with the deal. (The idea was John would put up $x money, the guy would buy the drugs and sell them, and give John $x+$y to save his company) THAT is entrapment. Simple solicitation is not.
The printer that we used used big chunks of colored wax which were melted and then used to print onto plain paper.
That's a Tektronix Phaser. Nice printers. But the prints don't last. I left several full page color prints in my car one day and they melted together. Also, you can scrape the wax right off of a finished print.
Not very practical in the real world, unfortunately.
Right, and it works so well in Canada...
You proved my point for me. Noteworthy:
The plural pronouns have also been put to use as pronouns of indefinite number to refer to singular nouns that stand for many persons
And:
The use of they, their, them, and themselves as pronouns of indefinite gender and indefinite number is well established in speech and writing
Note "singular nouns that stand for many persons" and "pronouns of indefinite gender and indefinite number". Not one. Many and indefinite. In other words, if you're talking about multiple people, "they" is acceptable. It isn't acceptable when you're referencing a single individual.
To use the term in the context we're discussing is completely wrong:
"...unless the administrator keeps detailed logs of everybody's account use - which is not required by law - they may well not know who was swapping files."
The word "they" would only be appropriate if we were discussing multiple people, as in this modified quote:
"...unless the administration keeps detailed logs of everybody's account use - which is not required by law - they may well not know who was swapping files."
You can try arguing with me, but arguing with Shakespeare about correct usage seems pretty hopeless.
Nowhere did Shakespeare use a plural to reference a single. In fact, only one of the quotes above did so:
"and every one to rest themselves betake" - every one = multiple people
"I would have everybody marry if they can do it properly" - everybody = multiple people
"it is too hideous for anyone in their senses to buy" - anyone refers to any number of people
"'tis meet that some more audience than a mother, since nature makes them partial, should o'erhear the speech" - some = multiple people
"a person can't help their birth" - This one is borderline, if not totally incorrect. "A person" is obviously a single person, so this should have been "can't help his birth."
"no man goes to battle to be killed. -- But they do get killed" - this could seem borderline, but Shaw obviously was referring to multiples. "No man goes to battle to be killed. But they (men) do get killed."
They can't imprison 65 million citizens.
Millions sit in our prisons today for the crime of smoking a plant in the privacy of their own home.
They don't have to imprison 65 million. They can, however, imprison several million to prove their point. Do you want to spend five years in prison and lose everything you own?
Actually, 'they' is perfectly acceptable when referring to people of unknown gender in a sentence and doesn't carry the predisposition that the person being talked about is male.
I can see you've never taken an English course. "They" is plural and is only acceptable when referring to multiple unknown people:
"We met some Eskimos. They were very friendly."
It is NOT appropriate when referring to one person:
"I heard a story about an Eskimo. Apparently, they purchased a number of sled dogs."
Using "he" is the only correct method here.
If 4 out of 5 people vote to steal the 5th person's money, that doesn't mean it is ok.
And yet my taxes still increase every year thanks to idiots voting yes on various bonds...
In other words, it's only OK if it's government backed.
You are welcome to use xxxxdd@xxxx.com any time.
Tried it. "This address has already been registered." Doh!
Very little air = very little resistance. The link you quote assumes people are falling at normal altitudes.
And before you start saying, yes but the criminals have guns, no they don't. Gun crime is extremely rare here.
1 9, 00.html
.
You're either ignorant, a liar or both. A quick Google on "gun crime in europe" reveals the truth on the matter. Case in point:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/gun/Story/0,2763,8718
Germany
Armed hostage-takings and robberies are relatively commonplace. In 2001, there were 11,270 gun-related offences. But gun crime is coming down sharply. The 2001 figure was a fall of almost 10% on the previous year.
France
Violent crimes, particularly armed robbery, increased by 9.8% in 2001, the last year for which figures are available, writes Jon Henley in Paris. Violence and insecurity became by far the most important issue in last year's tumultuous elections.
Spain
Gun crime has been relatively infrequent in Spain, writes Giles Tremlett in Madrid
However, alliances between Colombian cocaine cartels and the traditional smuggling fraternity of Galicia, north-west Spain, have brought a big increase in shootings.
Italy
The anxiety caused by violent crime was one of the factors that contributed to the election of Silvio Berlusconi's centre right government in 2001, writes Philip Willan in Rome.
I'm sorry to shock you out of your bullshit "gun control works" life. Large numbers of criminals most certainly have guns in Europe, and your citizens are unable to legally defend themselves.
would anybody see it as wrong if you copied their furniture?
In fact, I just did this. I literally measured my friend's desk and am building myself a copy.
No, he didn't give a hoot. Just like I don't care when he copies my CDs.
this wasn't in Issaquah, WA, was it? sounds kind of familiar.
;)
Actually yes, it was.
You can certainly refuse to take 1.4x10^5 pennies. A few years back a city courthouse refused to take approximately $200 when a man attempted to pay his fine with pennies.
A few years back a local man tried to pay his several hundred dollar debt at the local courthouse as well. He paid with normal money, but came up like 20 cents short after scavenging all that he could. He handed over a US postage stamp and the clerk refused to take it.
This was the last day he was allowed to pay his fine so warrants were put out for his arrest and the fine substantially increased. He sued, and won. Apparently, postage stamps are legal tender and must be accepted - at least by this particular government organization.
Aren't there fucking laws against this sort of thing?
Fucking laws? Well, those only apply if she's under the age of 18.
Sorry, you're wrong. Phones have the most current going through them on an incoming ring. I used to strip the wires with my teeth all the time. Nothing more than mild tingling, until an incoming call came in at the wrong time once. OUCH! Hurt like hell.
Dude!!
1. Buy OGG.COM.
2. Stream free OGG to everyone!!
3. ????
4. Profit!
I don't know if they make it, but I wish I could have found double-jacketed speaker wire -- ie, two jacketed pairs in a single jacket that could be stripped back near the end of a run for seperate speakers.
Uhm, so, this is really easy to find, I've got a thousand feet of it in my walls. I just bought "2 pair speaker wire". Yellow jacket around the outside, and red, black, white and some other color (it's been 3 years since I installed it) jackets on the inside.
Prices were listed on the page: (Canadian dollars, I assume, since they are based in Alberta)
No, US dollars. It says so on the linked page.