Even more off topic than this thread already is......

There are some funny "predator" jokes at http://www.alienlovespredator.com

Great. Now well have a debate over the use of the words Predator and Yautja

'Predator' is a derogatory racial epithet.

The name 'Yautja' doesn't appear in any of the movies.

The comics are canon.

Are Not.

Are too unless the movies contradict them.

3rd Gen Glock 23 (their .40 S&W compact) with Tritium sights. I'm pretty happy with the piece straight out of the box, so the sights are the only aftermarket mods.

No need. The actual definition nowhere mentions humans as the only possible perpetrators. That it has yet to be applied to aliens, androids, or superintelligent dogmen only means those situations have not come up yet.

The man named James McMurray who lives at my address and has my social security number has never been convicted of murder. Lack of prior examples does not preclude future occurrences.

I'm sure that as soon as alien murder does come up there will be all sorts of controversy surrounding it (primarily to distract the populace from real problems).

Not to speak for the rationality of petty criminals, but it is indeed quite possible to care about the legalities of the situation whilst robbing someone—aggravated assault and the chain above it (aggravated battery, mayhem, attempted murder) generally result in significantly harsher sentencing than simple assault and simple battery, even when robbery is involved.

~J

Not too shabby. I notice you didn't mention compensators in the type or description, you would like your nightvision intact during a low light confrontation, I take it?

How are the tritium sights working out? Used them in any "after dark" practice yet?

Most wild-west style confrontations were backshots (unless you are strictly talking movies here)

I would really recommend it. The difference is vast and is really an eye-opener. I am thinking of picking up an M1911-type, possibly a Sig GSR Nitron Carry or a Wilson Combat Professional.

Night sites make all the difference in the dark, don't they?

You may be mistaken. He obviously used the latin definition of "hacker", "haeckerus", meaning "drop bear"

Extremely difficult. For general public, after a background check, you can keep them at your residence. Transporting them to-from designated shooting ranges must be made by most direct, reasonable route (where you can also store them). I believe you have to notify of the transport too in some way, but I've never owned one so I'm a bit fuzzy on that. At home they must be locked in a safe of some sort when unattended. Unrestricted longarms (sporting shotguns, rifles) just need to have a trigger lock when unattended.

Generally it involves a career change to be able to carry around a handgun in daily activities.

Drop bears can be taken to court. They just have to be taken to a high court.

(hahaha!)

And I wouldn't recommend standing below that court.

That's pretty harsh. For all of my mixed opinions about living with the government I've got, I guess this is one thing I should be happy with.

That's your inner Shadowrunner talking. Try not to get too caught up in Method Acting when there's real Police.

Remember, they're not the corrupt 'Star, they're honest guys and gals trying to enforce peace and order.

Unless it's an asshole named Tenpenny. In which case, open fire.

How many drop bears have you tried to bring up on charges?

I don't really personally have a problem with it for a few reasons:
1) firearms of a minimum length, generally 26" overall and 18" barrels, are fairly easy to be aproved for, requiring only a $60 for 5 year certificate for the owner and, as of recently, free registration of the weapons; the $60 fee is also waived for people that can demonstrate a need for work which is leanent enough I could even get it if I felt like it and I haven't owned a gun in many years
2) society fulfills it's side of the "deal" by being safe enough that I feel no real need or even desire to carry a handgun; maybe only criminals, and the police, are carrying around handguns but the few that are and the rare times they are used it is usually against other criminals and occationally the police
3) people are stupid, and i'm more than happy to see the vast majority of them without firearms

For more legal info here a site you can check out. http://panda.com/canadaguns/

I really can't see that being a spectacularly good combination either. I'll end up paying for patching up a bunch of gunshot wounds? Not that that doesn't sometimes happen in the US and here already.

Incidentally a lot of the stuff at the start of that web page I find a bit dubious in it's presentation and intepretaton of "fact", and it doesn't help explain some things that at first leave you really scratching your head as to how exactly a particular situation could be arrived at. Understandable since he likely lacks some of the required background.

I just linked the page for it's quick summary of firearms laws from the perspective of what is different from the US.

Actually, according to statistics posted earlier that isn't true. Guns are far less dangerous than generic blunt objects, apparently.

Now that I think about it I can't help but wonder how he keeps running into Customs anways. The US/Canadian boarder is huge. It should be realitivly easy to avoid them.

That's not only bullshit, it's doubly bullshit when you're talking traffic cops.

~J

Nothing like a little prejudice to get the day started, eh Kage?

I'm going to pass on heading into that whole quagmire, thanks.

He lives on the west side of the continent. Over here you generally have to go seriously offroad/on foot, to avoid the manned border crossings. Some of the crossings aren't, or at least some time back weren't, manned 24 hours/day and you are just expected drive to the nearest law enforcement office across the border and report in. That may no longer be the case, that's going back a number of years now.

In the BC interior, which would mean crossing into either Idaho or eastern Washington, I think it was last year a guy got busted for pot smuggling who had apparently been making runs for some time using a snowmoblie. So the huge gapping holes in the border are there, you just can't really do it on roads, pretty much need to know the area, and if you keep doing it you'll eventually get caught.

When you get to Ontario and east you get into a lot more unmanned crossings, though they do have video cameras up roadside that could theoretically see you coming across. Once again I don't know exactly what the state of this is over the last 5 years. I do know that there are still people that live in one country but to leave their property to get anywhere on roads have to cross the boarder to the other country, and of course usually then come back to do whatever it is their trip was for. It is sort of an issue because, as you might guess, these roads usually didn't have a manned crossing facility set up because they see little-to-no traffic otherwise.

Yep, like the prejudice of assuming that everyone in a certain line of work is a saint.

As for traffic cops, no prejudice there: their job is quite clear, to generate revenue for the city. Fines are one of the worst practices in the history of law enforcement.

~J

Yep. His error doesn't forgive or even explain yours.

Sez you. I like having a well funded police force, even if it means my lead foot costs me some money every now and then. Obviously you're free to disagree (which I'm sure you will, albeit not as longwindedly as most here, since your rebuttals are generally short and to the point ).

The problem there is that relying on tickets for funding means that officers can't rely on people to speed. They have to make stuff up to fulfill their quotas. Most people won't contest a ticket even if it is completely flase because they don't feel that it is worth the hassle.

There are two types of corrupt. There is good corrupt and there is bad corrupt. Bad corrupt cops shake down people for protection money and execute civil rights workers. Good corrupt cops break the rules to protect the 'good guys' from dangerous violent thugs and South African dipolomats who place bombs under toilet seats. They look the other way when otherwise good people break the law for protection or revenge and they always win in the end. Unfortuantly, good corrupt cops are rather rare in the real world.

Maybe it's just me, but I see hundreds of people breaking various traffic laws every week just going back and forth from home to work (including myself). Add in other trips and the number probably doubles.

I'm not saying that making up offences isn't done, but I don't think it's done out of necessity. More likely IMO is that it's being done by cops that are too lazy to do the work of waiting around for real offenders. If you're supposed to give 8 tickets that day and you give 3 real and 7 fake in the first hour of the day you can goof off the rest of the day, while still looking like you've done more than your fair share.

Of course, then you get into the issue of whether quotas are good or not, but that's a whole nuther ball of wax.

Corruption (the bad kind to use hyz's differentiation) is fun and exciting. Watching some punk get smacked around by Sipowitz to get a confession is entertaining. Watching Vic Macke use his influence and street intel to rob an Armenian money laundering operation, or hold a child rapist's face to a stove burner is an amusing way to spend an hour on a Tuesday evening. Getting hassled by a butthead cop who gives you a ticket for something you didn't do is neither fun nor entertaining.

There are a lot of things that sell big on TV and in moveies that we don't actually want happening in our normal lives. Huge numbers of people went to see Saving Private Ryan. I'm pretty sure a microscopic portion of those would actually want to take part in the horror that was the real life storming of the beaches.

My sister's an MD at San Fran General. Reportedly, one of the things you'll see listed on a patient's medical history goes something like this:

"Patient was sitting in expensive car in bad neighborhood MMOB when an unidentified man shot him in the abdomen, then ran away. Blood tests positive for drug usage."

Minding My Own Business has actually become an abbreviation, it's used so frequently. Nothing like cruising for drugs and getting shot by your dealer.

She also reports that the bus drivers in San Fran are bad enough that she'll see HBMB (Hit By Muni Bus) on histories every once in a while.

Part of the problem with this is that a lot of these go away when people see a police car. Speeding takes place over a significant period of time and happens along long stretches of road. It's fairly easy to sit somewhere out of sight and wait for someone to drive by over the speed limit. It's harder to catch someone failing to signal and such.

Now, the traffic law I'd like to see enforced more aggressively, particularly because it's a safety issue in the same way speeding is, is failure to put on headlights in the rain, when wipers are necessary. This is illegal in a number of states, include the one in which I live, and people who don't put on their lights can be a real hazard as they are much harder to see.

Trees don't move, not even fallen ones. It is about noticing the other vehicles quickly and easily, and headlights are a huge factor in that. That is why motorcycle headlights are always full on, and have been this way for decades. Not noticing a motorcycle is a huge part of avoiding running into them, and they found that headlights greatly reduced the problem of motorcycles magically coming out of "nowhere".