Marswolf

Oh I don't know. I just couldn't figure out a reason to make a separate topic about it and though you might enjoy it.

To really get off topic, how about this story.... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,301296,00.html Hashemi Rafsanjani, former Iranian president and current Chairman of the Assembly of Experts, said Friday that Hitler’s treatment of Jewish people in Europe was due in part to their being “a pain in the neck.” Rafsanjani’s comments came during a sermon for "International Jerusalem Day" on Iranian TV. Rafsanjani noted that Jews caused problems for European governments because they “had a lot of property” and “controlled an empire of propaganda.” He also said that the Nazis were successful in saving Europe from the evil of Zionism. The former Iranian leader served as president from 1989 to 1997, and was succeeded by Mohammad Khatami. Rafsanjani ran for a third term in office in 2005, but lost to current President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

IMHO, pretty much all racing is being regulated to death by the sanctioning bodies.

Thanks for the post.

Boy, someone open a window and let some of the snootiness clear out. I live about 3 miles from the Bristol track as the crow flies. Last NASCAR race I saw there was 1967. Actually, I prefer other racing more than NASCAR too. Indy Car, F1, whatever, but I won't turn down watching NASCAR either - on TV. I'll be watching this weekend. But NASCAR has become an elitist roundabout rather than like the old days when they really were pretty much stock cars. I'd much rather be watching Fireball Roberts race in a convertible.

At least they hold an annual meeting.

I'll go along with the crowd on this matter.

Gore won. He fits right in with some of the other winners: * 2002 - Jimmy Carter * 2001 - United Nations, Kofi Annan * 1994 - Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin * 1993 - Nelson Mandela, F.W. de Klerk * 1990 - Mikhail Gorbachev * 1977 - Amnesty International * 1973 - Henry Kissinger, Le Duc Tho * 1964 - Martin Luther King

I had something similar happen to me when I left North Carolina. There, they tax your car as personal property. After I came moved back to Tennessee I got a bill from NC for the taxes I owed. I sent them a couple of letters explaining that I lived where they mailed the letter, but each response became more threatening. My final note to them told them they were idiots and they could waste all the postage they wanted, but that I would not respond to any more of their letters. NC also has a worthless vehicle "inspection". They always discover that your headlights aren't aimed properly and charge extra to have them re-aimed. Properly aimed apparently means that your low beams blind the approaching drivers. So, you get ripped off and go home and re-de-aim your headlights to where they should be.

http://www.vcdl.org/ Source: VCDL Newsletter: "You may recall that Judge Pugh of the Newport News Circuit Court was not issuing CHPs to members of the military stationed in Newport News unless they met with him personally and offered proof that they planned on staying in Virginia when their term in the military was over. That was illegal and unfair to our men and women who serve so selflessly in the military. I had contacted Judge Pugh's office and explained that Virginia law said permits were to be issued to military members whether that was their permanent home or they were just stationed there temporarily. No effect. Even though the Newport News City Council had no influence over the problem, VCDL members let them know about it back in November of 2006, hoping that City Council might talk to Judge Pugh. Nothing. VCDL then decided that it would foot the bill to have a member of the military take the matter before the Virginia Court of Appeals. We just needed the member of the military to say 'no' to Judge Pugh's demands and to let the Judge deny the application. That person, Christopher Deteresa, who is a Military Police officer nonetheless, stepped up to the plate and was turned down for his permit in May of 2007. VCDL then turned his case over to attorney Richard Gardiner to appeal. VICTORY! The Court of Appeals, after giving the Judge some basic English lessons (I can just picture the Court of Appeals rolling its collective eyes), ordered Judge Pugh to cease denying permits to the military stationed in his jurisdiction solely because they are not permanent residents! Judge Pugh could have easily avoided this embarrassment, but wouldn't listen to reason. Oh, well. This ruling will apply to the entire state, so if there are any other judges who decide to play such games with our military, we now have the tool to stop such abuse. VCDL would like to thank CPT Deteresa, who is currently deployed, for not only fighting for his country, but also fighting for the rights of his military comrades. He could have caved-in to Judge Pugh to get his permit, but he refused so as to put an end to Judge Pugh's foolishness. Here is a link to the ruling: http://www.vcdl.org/pdf/AppealsNN.pdf VIRGINIA: In the Court of Appeals of Virginia on Wednesday, 3rd October, 2007. In Re: Concealed Weapon Application of Christopher Matthew Deteresa Record No. 1909-07-1 Circuit Court No. 16633-DP From the Circuit Court of the City of Newport News Per Curiam By order dated May 22, 2007, the Circuit Court of the City of Newport News denied petitioner's second application pursuant to Code § 18.2-308(D) for a permit to carry a concealed handgun, having been previously denied a permit by order entered May 30, 2005, on the ground that he is not a domiciliary of Newport News. Code § 18.2-308(D) provides in pertinent part as follows: Any person 21 years of age or older may apply in writing to the clerk of the circuit court of the county or city in which he resides, or if he is a member of the United States Armed Forces, the county or city in which he is domiciled, for a five-year permit to carry a concealed handgun. There shall be no requirement regarding the length of time an applicant has been a resident or domiciliary of the county or city. The circuit court heard testimony ore tenus, and found as follows in denying petitioner's application for a permit: [Petitioner's] temporary, transit and actual place of residence is the City of Newport News. He is a temporary resident solely due to military status and orders. The evidence presented this date does not show that Newport News is his permanent residence or is his true, fixed, permanent home and principal establishment, to which whenever he is absent he had the intention of returning. Petitioner argues that the statute does not require a member of the United States Armed Forces to be a domiciliary of a jurisdiction to be eligible for a permit. Rather, the plain language of the statute provides that an applicant who is a member of the United States Armed Forces may be either a domiciliary, or, alternatively, a resident. We agree. Generally, phrases separated by a comma and the disjunctive "or," are independent. See,~, Ruben v. Secretary of DHHS, 22 Cl. Ct. 264, 266 (1991) (finding that, the word "or" connects two parts of a sentence, '''but disconnect their meaning'"(quoting G. Curme, A Grammar of the English Language, Syntax 166 (1986»)); Quindlen v. Prudential Ins. Co., 482 F.2d 876, 878 (5th Cir. 1973) (noting disjunctive results in alternatives, which must be treated separately) .... Smoot v. Commonwealth, 37 Va. App. 495, 501,559 S.E.2d 409,412 (2002). The phrase in Code § 18.2-308(D) allowing "any person" to apply for a permit in the county or city in which he resides and the phrase allowing "a member of the United States Armed Forces" to apply for a permit in the county or city in which he is domiciled are separated by a comma and the disjunctive "or." Thus, that language plainly indicates that if the applicant is a member of the United States Armed Forces, in addition to his right, as with any other person, to apply to the circuit court where he resides, he may alternatively apply for a permit to the circuit court where he is domiciled. Accordingly, based on the circuit court's finding that petitioner is a resident of the City of Newport News, he is eligible to apply for a permit in that jurisdiction. The order appealed from is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the Circuit Court of the City of Newport News for entry of further orders consistent with this order.

What??? You don't have hand grenades?

Might work out the other way. Kinda like the Army - Navy game. You never know who will win.

Or a prostitute?

40-35-111. Authorized terms of imprisonment and fines for felonies and misdemeanors. — (a) A sentence for a felony is a determinate sentence. ( The authorized terms of imprisonment and fines for felonies are: (1) Class A felony, not less than fifteen (15) nor more than sixty (60) years. In addition, the jury may assess a fine not to exceed fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), unless otherwise provided by statute; (2) Class B felony, not less than eight (8) nor more than thirty (30) years. In addition, the jury may assess a fine not to exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000), unless otherwise provided by statute; (3) Class C felony, not less than three (3) years nor more than fifteen (15) years. In addition, the jury may assess a fine not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000), unless otherwise provided by statute; (4) Class D felony, not less than two (2) years nor more than twelve (12) years. In addition, the jury may assess a fine not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000), unless otherwise provided by statute; and (5) Class E felony, not less than one (1) year nor more than six (6) years. In addition, the jury may assess a fine not to exceed three thousand dollars ($3,000), unless otherwise provided by statute. © A sentence to pay a fine, when imposed on a corporation for an offense defined in title 39 or for any offense defined in any other title for which no special corporate fine is specified, is a sentence to pay an amount, not to exceed: (1) Three hundred fifty thousand dollars ($350,000) for a Class A felony; (2) Three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) for a Class B felony; (3) Two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) for a Class C felony; (4) One hundred twenty-five thousand dollars ($125,000) for a Class D felony; and (5) Fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) for a Class E felony. If a special fine for a corporation is expressly specified in the statute which defines an offense, the fine fixed shall be within the limits specified in the statute. (d) A sentence for a misdemeanor is a determinate sentence. (e) The authorized terms of imprisonment and fines for misdemeanors are: (1) Class A misdemeanor, not greater than eleven (11) months, twenty-nine (29) days or a fine not to exceed two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or both, unless otherwise provided by statute; (2) Class B misdemeanor, not greater than six (6) months or a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500), or both, unless otherwise provided by statute; and (3) Class C misdemeanor, not greater than thirty (30) days or a fine not to exceed fifty dollars ($50.00), or both, unless otherwise provided by statute. [Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 6.]

I guess if you go around naked, you have to open carry.... Or at least I hope so.

Can we just make a numbered list of insults so we won't take as much bandwidth? Like Rabbi - #14!!!

Spay or neutering.... 39-17-1307. Unlawful carrying or possession of a weapon. - (a) (1) A person commits an offense who carries with the intent to go armed a firearm, a knife with a blade length exceeding four inches (4²), or a club. (2) An offense under subdivision (a)(1) is a Class C misdemeanor, except it is a Class A misdemeanor if the person's carrying of a handgun occurred at a place open to the public where one (1) or more persons were present. ( (1) A person commits an offense who possesses a handgun and: (A) Has been convicted of a felony involving the use or attempted use of force, violence or a deadly weapon; or ( Has been convicted of a felony drug offense. (2) An offense under subdivision ((1) is a Class E felony. © (1) A person commits an offense who possesses any deadly weapon with intent to employ it in the commission of or escape from an offense. (2) An offense under subdivision ©(1) is a Class E felony.

The "oddballs" are covered just by the participants.

Yeah, it's been done to death. But some folks just won't listen. But you are right dcloud, Glockodists are just so much fun to pick at that I can't resist either. I had forgotten about the cheesy front sight. I replaced the sights on my G23 with tritium ones and was amazed at the way the front sight was installed at the factory. At least the replacement had a screw. Just more perfection....

You also have to sign up for mywastedtime! Don't they make that AR in a 30 round cylinder version?

Why, you are just a puppy.

I'll pick column "B" - bad parenting. I think it's a good idea to have responsible trained stable adults in the schools with handguns. But they need to be adults, and trained, and stable. I know some teachers who may not fit any of those criterions.

Uh...yes KaBooms do happen more often with a Glock although I don't know of any statistics I would trust. It's a matter of gun design. But if you stick with decent factory loads, you will be OK. It's overloads that blow them up and with enough overloading you can blow up any gun. I would stay away from American Brand factory ammunition. It is bad enough to prevent my USP from going into battery and firing. Some Glocks will apparently fire that way. Any "name brand" ammo should be fine.

Hold it folks! She doesn't want a gun because she is afraid of the kids. That sounds like a possibility that can not be ignored. Either the school system needs to let her protect herself, or they need to provide the protection themselves.