TMF

[quote name="Lumber_Jack" post="1122694" timestamp="1394467845"]The terms the reports are using like "the plane may have u-turned" or "we are searching the planned flight path" lead me to believe that they didn't have exact coordinates of the plane. Especially not to the level that US air traffic controllers do. Either that or its just the authorities being vague on purpose[/quote] I guess that's possible, but we are taking about an aircraft worth more than the GDP of Malaysia (exaggeration, but making a point) and it would cost less than $500/year to know the exact location of that aircraft updated every 4 seconds. There are fleet trucks that deliver bread that have this technology. I refuse to believe that this aircraft does not. It wouldn't matter if the aircraft changed course, did loopty loops or barrel rolls. Hips don't lie and neither do coordinates. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[quote name="TerryW" post="1122631" timestamp="1394459050"] Does anybody know where the aircraft was last seen on radar? Conventional radar drops off after the shoreline, I forget how many miles but it's not very far. If my memory serves me correctly, long over water flying is done on tracks and aircraft are "tracked" via sat com position reports from the pilots. It's been years since I've done it but I remember you are all by your lonesome as far as air traffic control radar is concerned. If the terrorists want to make the plane look like David Copperfield made it disappear, over water leaves everyone guessing about it and it's contents whereabouts. Sad for those families. My family unexpectedly lost a cousin for several months before his body was found and it tore my aunt and uncle to pieces wondering. [/quote] I'm no commercial airliner pilot, but a global tracking device which reports to satellite it's position can be owned and paid for monthly subscription for less than the average person pays for a smartphone and data. I'm assuming that the airline would know the last known coordinates for the aircraft. Hell, most public transit platforms are tracked with global devices that update every 10 seconds. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  When did he start being reclusive?

Yup. Sad when we lose these walking, talking links to history. Glad he was able to live a long life though. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[quote name="vontar" post="1122468" timestamp="1394412926"]Does this mean there will be a shortage of blasting supplies for strip mining increasing the cost of coal? Think about it, they don't want people using coal as it is. [/quote] No. Explosives are pretty cheap and 1400 lbs isn't much at all. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[quote name="gun sane" post="1122254" timestamp="1394379452"]In addition to the millions of ammo rounds, the airline passenger molesters are buying 1400 pounds of dynamite. Perhaps for data mining.... [url="http://www.prepperpodcast.com/tsa-orders-over-half-ton-of-high-powered-explosive/#axzz2vO0iidHp"]http://www.prepperpodcast.com/tsa-orders-over-half-ton-of-high-powered-explosive/#axzz2vO0iidHp[/url][/quote] 1400 lbs? For the whole TSA? Meh, I've blown more demo in one day. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[quote name="Mike.357" post="1122141" timestamp="1394345127"]Okay, how do you know he is lining his pockets?[/quote] I don't know, I'm making the fair assumption that is the case based on past reports of similar incidents at retail chains, where the clerk was taking payment for holding/notifying the arrival of a product. Perhaps this guy was friend or family. I don't know. If the guy wasnt a close friend or family it seems pretty stupid to risk his job just for some guy, doesn't it? Considering that people are generally motivated by money the answer is pretty obvious. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[quote name="orientalexpress" post="1122137" timestamp="1394344108"]I mean the least the guy deserves is a good tar and feathering right? Sounds to me like there hasn't been an outcome. I'll be interested to see if the OP goes back and looks for the sales guy.[/quote] Why are you being ridiculous? The dude was breaking the rules and misrepresenting the company he worked for, with the result being a denial of sale to a customer. The OP notified the management. You compare that to tar and feathering? I made a thoughtful, serious response. You respond with ridiculous exaggerations. Have we hit a nerve with this thread? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[quote name="crossfire" post="1122096" timestamp="1394334908"]Still, I would hate to see him fired for something like this. But that's in Academy's hands where it should be.[/quote] Yeah, I hear you. No one wants that bad karma, but what does one do? Choice is either to stop patronizing a business or suck it up and accept that you'll never get what you want from that source because it's been corrupted. I would feel obligated to say something to the employer simply out if courtesy. If the employee is a good worker and this is just one screw up, I'm betting they'll just tell him to stop. But if this is an employee with a history of being a poor performer and engaging in shady stuff like this after being told not to, then you have done the manager a favor and it is the fault of the employee 100% if he gets canned. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[quote name="orientalexpress" post="1122074" timestamp="1394331439"]I hope they throw him in jail! Even better we can all march up to his house in an angry mob with pitch forks and burn him at the stake.... Regards, sarcasm[/quote] Dude, he broke the rules and was screwing customers. Besides the fact the guy was using his position in an unethical way, if you were running a business wouldn't you want to know if one of your employees were turning away customers so he could line his own pockets? I would. Taking the scenario to the extreme, as you're doing with your response above, then ridiculing the outcome is silly. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[quote name="Oh Shoot" post="1121960" timestamp="1394307820"]Yup, it's not necessarily unlawful to consume while packing, but the first sip in an establishment open to the public becomes a Class A 'meanor. - OS[/quote] Yup. I don't much agree with it, since I believe that someone who gets drunk while packing would do so whether the law allowed for drinking to a level below legal intoxication or not. The illegality of consuming ANY alcohol while carrying is silly,in my opinion. I made it a point the last time I was in Indiana to have a few beers at dinner while packing. Up there it isn't a crime. Somehow I didn't get into a drunken shootout. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[quote name="Caster" post="1121958" timestamp="1394307366"]I for one will be glad when we start mandatory retesting. there are LOTS of people who have no business on the road. Many teenagers yes but JUST as many people over the age of 50, if not more. I've always found the idea absurd that you can just pay the fee and get your license renewed at 70 years old when it's been over 50 years since your test. Things like eye sight and reaction time change MUCH over the years.[/quote] 57 isn't that old. I don't think age was a factor here. I think it was just an impatient POS that needs to be ground up into fertilizer. Since moving to Tennessee I've seen this several times where people will pass a school bus that is stopped or fixing to stop. Those people should lose their license immediately, just the same as a drunk driver. I recall my dad retelling a story where he had ticketed some woman who passed a school bus while it was stopped. She was a rich ahole type who was too important for schoolchildren, and decided to fight it in court. The judge found her guilty and explained that the maximum fine for such was $500, which he said he wouldn't impose on her. She had a moment of relief to hear that she wouldn't be slammed with a full fine, and that's when the judge fined her $499. People who a reckless around school buses and pass them while picking up/dropping off kids should automatically lose their license. People who injure or kill school children while passing a bus that is stopped should spend life in jail. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Ah, he didnt know. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Oh dear. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If I had been involved in this or had seen this happen, I would absolutely spread the word. Thing is, in some respects I'm a pretty heartless bastard. I have some very good friends that I've lost over the past few years, along with folks I would consider buddies and acquaintances. I didnt think much about it when some of them were lost. It was part of the deal. You go to war and you might die. If it were me doing the dying I wouldn't expect my buddies to lose much sleep over it. Hell, I wouldn't want them to. So it didnt affect me much. But when we came home and did ceremonies for the fallen and their families showed up it was a whole different story. These weren't just buddies who drew the short straw. They were sons, brothers and fathers. Seeing the families made me bawl like a bitch once I got to where no one could see me. I'll admit, when I saw this story teased I didn't even click on it. I saw it in this thread and decided to take a look. It started out with introducing an air national guard officer, which is about as POG as one can get, so I had my prejudices about it. Then in continued and I heard that boy's story. I couldn't watch it all the way through. What that boy is going through is exactly what I worried about my boy going through when I left him at 5 months old to go back to Iraq. I see nothing here but the purest form of emotion. Yeah, maybe the press is clinging on to it for a few more hits on their website, but that doesn't take away from what this is. The father is a hero. The boy has shouldered a burden for this country that most of us, to include myself, will never understand. Our obligation, as fellow Americans, is to honor the fallen and the families that have made the sacrifice. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I did not pass the toughness test. Did not know it would go that way. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well, that is a the holiest site to our ruling class. Might as well be the Democrat version of The Vatican. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Sea otters apparently do pretty evil stuff. They are known to violently rape females in their species to the point that it sometimes results in death. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

No, I wouldn't risk my job to help out my friends with something as trivial as getting them an inside edge on ammo so they can mark it up and make a profit. Anyone that would is just a slimy sleazeball. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Those issues were worked out a long, long time ago. The modern M16/M4 functions absolutely flawlessly if maintained properly. The modern stories of rifles failing in the sandbox are because they're operated by undisciplined children with worthless NCOs who have never put a dab of CLP on their rifle and the damn thing is full of desert dust. I've carried M16 series rifles for over a decade through deserts in half a dozen different countries. My rifle has always functioned fine flawlessly, even with dust, carbon, water and even the Chicken and Rice menu MRE in the upper. The rifle is just more reliable than some of the troops who have no business carrying one. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This is where I'm at. From what I've seen over the years from my fellow Americans, the most vocal people (whether they be atheists or Christian) who scream of encroachment on their way of life, beliefs and having the opposing side's beliefs shoved down their throat don't actually care about anyone else's beliefs being marginalized, they just care about their own. From my perspective it seems as if those vocal folks sit on the fringes. I have a family member who has gone over the edge in terms of Christian fundamentalism. I have a very close friend who is an outspoken atheist. If I put them both in a room together both of them would argue that the other one wishes to marginalize them and use the government to control their way of life based on the other's belief structure. So which one is right? Both of them. They're also very, very wrong; both of them. I don't think it is any more appropriate to claim that "all" atheists are evangelicals looking to convert everyone to their way of life anymore than I think it is appropriate to claim "all" Christians are trying to do the same. Think of how many Christians you may know who never bring it up, so you can't claim that they're trying to change or control you. Now think about how many atheists never bring it up. You would never know they were atheists. So how would that make the whole of them "evangelicals". And since we can't go a single thread without bringing up the gay thing, I could compare the same here. I never knew any gay folks until I was an adult. The ones I met were screaming queens that literally floated when they walked. I always thought it was ridiculous that the gays all walked around flaunting their gayness in everyone's face, and yeah, it pissed me off and made me really resentful of homos. Then I found out about a family friend who was gay. I'd been around this person enough to not classify them as girly man, and they weren't a weirdo. Since then I've been around a few more gay folks that were pretty normal, with the exception of not liking chicks. I think back on my earlier perception of gays, and consider the reason I classified all gays as being "up in your face" about it was because the only ones I'd know to be gay would have to be "up in your face" to know it. Therefore, there exists the possibility that I've met hundreds of gay people and never knew it. How could I classify those people the same as the screaming queens? How could one judge all atheist based on the loudness of a few? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm pretty sure the world has always been pretty violent and full of evil. We've just reached the point where we demonize those who wish to defend themselves and apologize for those that commit violence against innocents. It used to be people defended their lives and their homes, and those that attacked them would hang from a tree. Now we give them free college. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Ha, well not at my post office. I have more than a dozen stories about these guys I can reference off hand. The carriers I've had the worst experience with, but the personnel you deal with at the actual post office haven't faired much better. Beyond the inability to accomplish their basic service, their attitude is always terrible. When I walk into the UPS store to ship something I'm always met with good customer service, or at worst decent customer service. Every time, EVERY TIME I've gone into my local post office to ship something they act like I'm just a huge inconvenience to them. In a real job they'd be fired. It's just like going into the DMV. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Purdy much. I know my abilities and limitations more than most shooters. With my Glock I can get two hits in a 3 inch dot at 7m in 2.2 seconds from the holster. I have done better, but this is the standard I've qualified at and can achieve consistently. I can't do the same with my 1911, however I can get a first round hit in about the same amount of time as my Glock (and that is with having to manipulate a safety). I don't doubt there are plenty of good shooters out there who can do better than that with a .45, but there aren't a high percentage amongst the everyday pistol carrier. Recoil management is a huge thing when it comes to accurately engaging with follow up rounds. I manage recoil pretty well. I've been to the range enough times to know that this isn't a skill (recoil management and quick follow up shots/sight acquisition) that the average shooter has. So no, I wouldn't suggest a person go out and choose their caliber based on gel tests alone. A lot more to it. I certainly don't condone shooters trying to convince novice shooters that 9mm shouldn't be considered over more damaging calibers. That is misinformation and irresponsible to do. But I still carry my .45 sometimes. You won't hear me say that it is silly to carry a .40 when a .45 is bigger and better. So I don't understand folks who insist that carrying a 9mm instead of a .40 is wrong. Much more goes into it than that. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Entire militaries have 9mm pistols. Most of them in the world do. In fact, there are more 9mm pistols in the US military than there are badged law enforcement in the US. So does that make the caliber more or less legitimate or effective? I would argue that it doesn't mean anything. Just trying, once again, to dismiss anecdotal nonsense with anecdotal nonsense. Like I keep saying, I don't care about calibers. I carry a few different ones and have no emotional attachment to a bullet diameter. That would be stupid. My issue is folks perpetuating nonsense because "they heard this once" or "read this somewhere". Isn't there a sticky or something on this? Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk