Most, if not all, cops in California use Jacketed Hollow Points. I'm sure they use FMJ at the range, but in all my years of shooting I don't think I've run into a cop that used FMJ in his duty weapon. The ammunition is issued by the department, so it's not like they get to choose. I know for sure Los Angles and San Francisco use JHP, or at least they did until very recently.
What's a realistic range for an aimed shot in 5.56 NATO? 300 meters? But the bullet can go more than a mile if you put it in the right trajectory. I wouldn't mind having a round that destroys itself after 300 meters. More than that and you're probably hitting something you didn't aim at.
It's not an exploding bullet. Exploding bullets are nothing new - they've been around for at least 100 years. In small arms calibers they're less effective than lead if your goal is to make someone dead, or everybody would be using them already. Until Reagan was shot with exploding bullets (which should give you some idea of how effective they are - he survived being shot near the heart) you used to be able to buy them mail order from ads in gun magazines. They're basically gimmick rounds, particularly in 5.56 NATO.
Let's say you traced the bitcoin transaction to Russia or Ukraine (which is pretty likely). What are you going to do if the local sovereign government refuses to extradite? I wouldn't be at all surprised to find the NSA knows who these people are, but we're not ready to go to war over the odd $8500.
Two reasons. One, they have a $32bn equity stake in Alibaba, which is hugely successful.
And two, they still have a billion active users on their portal sites (Yahoo News, Yahoo Sports, Yahoo Finance, etc), which is why they were trying to rebrand as a "media company".
At its nadir Apple looked ready to go bankrupt because it didn't do anything that wasn't done better by someone else. Yahoo has smart people and money to invest in new services and products. Yahoo could still pull off the business equivalent of a moon shot.
In the US we don't normally arrest people for honest mistakes, assuming they actually made mistakes, even if it's a result of incompetence. Unless someone has evidence to the contrary, it's perfectly reasonable to arrest the protesters without arresting anyone at the company.
I really, really don't like this idea that someone has to go to jail every time something goes wrong. It's corrosive, and it will end up shielding people who really do belong in jail.
If you point a laser at a plane or helicopter in the US, the feds will come down on you with both feet. This guy got fourteen years for it, though the sentence was reduced to five years on appeal.
Sure, they didn't put any effort into Firefox security last year, but at least Mozilla was taking care of the important things. I mean, they sent Brendan Eich packing for a small political contribution, didn't they?
Yes, but I doubt many cheaters expect to get caught.
Re:And there was much rejoicing!
on
Carly Is Out
·
· Score: 1
I disagree. Rubio, Cruz, and Bush would all make acceptable presidents, in my opinion. Fiorina would have been fine, too.
Anyway, in the real world you're going to have to live with the "False Dichotomy choices", since the system is really only stable with two parties. Third parties tend to eclipse one of the previous two, and then it's a two-party game again.
That's probably why Sanders is running as a Democrat after being officially independent all those years.
That makes sense to me. If you win something based on merit it becomes part of your identity. "I'm a fast runner" or "I'm good at math." That will put you under pressure (internal and external) to make sure it happens.
No they haven't. Find one case where someone was convicted of murder purely on the basis of people making separate accusations, with no physical evidence. Particularly if they waited years to go to the cops. If you find it you've found a travesty of justice.
And how do you know there's no collaboration? And even if there isn't, how do you know other women weren't just "piling on" because they didn't like him? At the very least I expect victims of this kind of stuff to go to the cops and get their story down in black and white. To come along years later with an accusation is just pointless.
And if it's rape there will be physical evidence. Anyone who waits until the physical evidence is gone shouldn't expect to be taken seriously. We've seen altogether too many fabrications in that department.
So fine, you think twice and then blow the whistle. The problem is when you wait long enough for all the evidence to be gone it becomes a he said/she said story in which the truth is unknowable by anybody else.
After all the high profile rape hoaxes we've had in recent years, in general I'm willing to say "Hey, if you didn't think it was rape enough to go to the cops, you probably weren't raped." But if his old students and colleagues are coming out of the woodwork making similar accusations it does lend some credibility to her story.
The way the tenure system works you really, really don't want to make an enemy out of the powerful people above you. From what I can see it's much worse than getting hit on by your boss at a job - you can always quit an office job and get another. But in academia if you just up and leave a tenure track position or don't get tenure because you've alienated someone important, your career is pretty much over.
Slashdot Mirror
Most, if not all, cops in California use Jacketed Hollow Points. I'm sure they use FMJ at the range, but in all my years of shooting I don't think I've run into a cop that used FMJ in his duty weapon. The ammunition is issued by the department, so it's not like they get to choose. I know for sure Los Angles and San Francisco use JHP, or at least they did until very recently.
Been accused of using. There's not much in the way of actual evidence.
What's a realistic range for an aimed shot in 5.56 NATO? 300 meters? But the bullet can go more than a mile if you put it in the right trajectory. I wouldn't mind having a round that destroys itself after 300 meters. More than that and you're probably hitting something you didn't aim at.
It's not an exploding bullet. Exploding bullets are nothing new - they've been around for at least 100 years. In small arms calibers they're less effective than lead if your goal is to make someone dead, or everybody would be using them already. Until Reagan was shot with exploding bullets (which should give you some idea of how effective they are - he survived being shot near the heart) you used to be able to buy them mail order from ads in gun magazines. They're basically gimmick rounds, particularly in 5.56 NATO.
Let's say you traced the bitcoin transaction to Russia or Ukraine (which is pretty likely). What are you going to do if the local sovereign government refuses to extradite? I wouldn't be at all surprised to find the NSA knows who these people are, but we're not ready to go to war over the odd $8500.
If I made ransomware I'd put in a six month delay so even if you had a backup you'd lose six months of work.
Two reasons. One, they have a $32bn equity stake in Alibaba, which is hugely successful.
And two, they still have a billion active users on their portal sites (Yahoo News, Yahoo Sports, Yahoo Finance, etc), which is why they were trying to rebrand as a "media company".
At its nadir Apple looked ready to go bankrupt because it didn't do anything that wasn't done better by someone else. Yahoo has smart people and money to invest in new services and products. Yahoo could still pull off the business equivalent of a moon shot.
Clearly you know who the Kardashians are.
In the US we don't normally arrest people for honest mistakes, assuming they actually made mistakes, even if it's a result of incompetence. Unless someone has evidence to the contrary, it's perfectly reasonable to arrest the protesters without arresting anyone at the company.
I really, really don't like this idea that someone has to go to jail every time something goes wrong. It's corrosive, and it will end up shielding people who really do belong in jail.
If you point a laser at a plane or helicopter in the US, the feds will come down on you with both feet. This guy got fourteen years for it, though the sentence was reduced to five years on appeal.
Sure, they didn't put any effort into Firefox security last year, but at least Mozilla was taking care of the important things. I mean, they sent Brendan Eich packing for a small political contribution, didn't they?
Sure, sure. Right up until Dr. X's mircoparticle cloud destroys them.
No Congress can actually make something permanent without a change to the constitution. It should really read "permanent until we change our minds".
um... you know there was a body, right?
Yes, but I doubt many cheaters expect to get caught.
I disagree. Rubio, Cruz, and Bush would all make acceptable presidents, in my opinion. Fiorina would have been fine, too.
Anyway, in the real world you're going to have to live with the "False Dichotomy choices", since the system is really only stable with two parties. Third parties tend to eclipse one of the previous two, and then it's a two-party game again.
That's probably why Sanders is running as a Democrat after being officially independent all those years.
That makes sense to me. If you win something based on merit it becomes part of your identity. "I'm a fast runner" or "I'm good at math." That will put you under pressure (internal and external) to make sure it happens.
What if your name is "Pat"?
I didn't think I'd live to see the end of that legal battle.
No they haven't. Find one case where someone was convicted of murder purely on the basis of people making separate accusations, with no physical evidence. Particularly if they waited years to go to the cops. If you find it you've found a travesty of justice.
And how do you know there's no collaboration? And even if there isn't, how do you know other women weren't just "piling on" because they didn't like him? At the very least I expect victims of this kind of stuff to go to the cops and get their story down in black and white. To come along years later with an accusation is just pointless.
And if it's rape there will be physical evidence. Anyone who waits until the physical evidence is gone shouldn't expect to be taken seriously. We've seen altogether too many fabrications in that department.
No it doesn't. More claims means more claims.
Yes, it is. If you're going to prosecute someone for a crime, you need evidence, not a witch hunt.
So fine, you think twice and then blow the whistle. The problem is when you wait long enough for all the evidence to be gone it becomes a he said/she said story in which the truth is unknowable by anybody else.
After all the high profile rape hoaxes we've had in recent years, in general I'm willing to say "Hey, if you didn't think it was rape enough to go to the cops, you probably weren't raped." But if his old students and colleagues are coming out of the woodwork making similar accusations it does lend some credibility to her story.
The way the tenure system works you really, really don't want to make an enemy out of the powerful people above you. From what I can see it's much worse than getting hit on by your boss at a job - you can always quit an office job and get another. But in academia if you just up and leave a tenure track position or don't get tenure because you've alienated someone important, your career is pretty much over.