LongJim

This made me laugh, actually. Would love to see Vito do this.

Yes, I'm aware of the author's credentials. The many links to other scientific sources within the article are what is worth your while.

Here's a pretty good blog post that sums up a lot of my thoughts on this subject. https://medium.com/@pullnews/what-i-learned-about-climate-change-the-science-is-not-settled-1e3ae4712ace

Hopefully you read the link I included. Apparently their are a few "ignorant" scientists? Or maybe they are stupid? Or are they just careless with data or willfully misleading? I don't want to believe that's the case. Too bad peers didn't really review the data properly. But that's what happens sometimes when there are agendas and research $ involved I choose to be skeptical of anyone claiming to be an expert on anything that potentially involves government or taxpayer $. I don't agree with you = Trump supporter. Awesome. I guess you don't really want discourse on this subject.

Climate has fluctuated over millennia. It always will. Should we do what is necessary to lessen man's negative impact? Yes. But it is not "settled science", nor is it exact science. And that's the problem. http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2018/11/resplandy-et-al-correction-and-response/

Ah...gotcha.

Yeah it's a beautiful area. Wasn't that cold actually. 40s. Light breeze.

Reported was 15,219. I'd say it was probably 9-10k at most.

Decided to take in the Kansas/Texas game. Couple of observations: 1. Game day atmosphere is infinitely better at Apogee. 2. Apogee is much nicer facility than Memorial. 3. Fan support is greater at UNT. 4. Seats were $17 each. Let that sink in. Lawrence is a beautiful town with beautiful campus, and really cool shops/bar area. Great college town to visit. Of course, UNT repped by my alumna wife.

86% end in scores overall. Dont have 2nd half stats. Around #46 in the nation.

I'm editing this post. Not one of my better ones. But sometimes this place wears me out.

No reason TSU can't have a consistently successful program.

I think that is correct. Needed around 12500 to break it.

Lots of folks have been able to reseed with something like Scott's EZ Patch. Easy to apply and pretty inexpensive. Let that sink in.

Light layer of peat moss. Aerate. Let that sink in.

I put winter fertilizer down last week. Let that sink in.

The issue is that the prescribed laws that we were talking about earlier in this thread--and similar prohibitions proposed by legislators currently--were in place in CA at the time of this incident, and they had absolutely no effect on this event as a deterrent. It illustrates my point about this type of legislation not addressing root cause for these events, which were not widespread in the past. What in our society, and what stressors have changed, such that this behavior is becoming more frequent?

Yes, in a state where guns are most heavily regulated. In California: "All firearms sales, transfers, including private transactions and sales at gun shows, must go through a California licensed firearms dealer." "It is unlawful to offer for manufacture, sale, give or lend any “assault weapon” or .50 caliber BMG rifle. It is unlawful to possess an “assault weapon” or a .50 caliber BMG rifle unless it is properly registered with the state." The above are two of the points discussed earlier in this thread. Hopefully the next lunatic is more up to date on his civic responsibilities.

Thanks for the reply. I respect your opinion. The last three items are ideas to begin changes culturally. Frankly, I believe those do begin to address the real problem. They speak to personal responsibility and respect for authority and others. And again--I'm referring to current proposed legislation, which I believe is worthless and ill-advised. To capacity/sales/3D points, I believe they would be so ineffective as to be essentially worthless as well. All we would have is another law that does virtually nothing to prevent these types of events. It's pointless to ban a gun that looks scary, and then specifically exempt an essentially identical gun because it doesn't have a pistol grip--which is exactly what the bill does. How does banning the Mini-14 Tactical and exempting the Mini-14 Ranch help? What exactly will banning private sales solve? And how will this be enforced? Undercover folks, I'm assuming. How will a sale between two brothers, or two good friends go down? Why would that be any of the government's business? Unenforceable. How does one ban tens of millions of already-legal clips and guns which are being used legally? Does possession of these items now become a crime? If so, how does that stop a bad actor from using one he already owns? What stops him from purchasing 3 8 shot clips legally instead of 2 10's, and then using them in the gun he purchased legally due to the exemptions within the above bill? And then when the next shooting occurs, and about the same number of casualties occur, do we reduce the clip limit to 5? 4? Are we trying to reduce the number of fatalities, or stop them altogether? It just seems to me to be worthless legislation. Regarding 3D printing--Pandora's box is already open. Regardless, I don't personally believe most mass shooters are going to bother with them. But ok, for the sake of argument, let's ban them. It's not going to stop the info from circulating the web for those that want to waste their time with it. Let me know what you think. I'd specifically like to know how you think those points would have stopped shootings like Pittsburgh. I don't see where they would have had any effect at all, nor do I see that they would have any effect on any similar event in the future.

No way to ban mental defectives, nor did I suggest that. We have to recognize their existence, and determine why they are increasingly acting in a way that was not widespread in the past. I'm afraid it will take a couple of generations to correct much of the damage that has been done culturally. Essentially, we have stopped caring about each other in meaningful ways, and there is no respect or consideration for each other or authority. But a few things that would hopefully be more effective than worthless, ill-advised legislation like that mentioned above: Stop demonizing police, and increase their presence in high-crime areas. Allow teacher/administrator concealed carry on campuses nationwide. Eliminate cell-phone use in public schools completely. Increase incentives for fathers to stay in the home with the kids they father, instead of incentives for them to leave. Stop glorifying and pushing video games, music and entertainment that encourages killings, executions, assassination, mutilation, drug sales, cannibalism, rewarding extra points for blowing someones head off, etc. There are a few for you off the top of my head.

Very interesting article below, and some of us of a certain age remember a time when much of this was commonplace. The question that needs to be answered is--"What has changed?" https://www.nationalreview.com/2013/01/gun-clubs-school-charles-c-w-cooke/

I think all of those things would be ineffective at stopping an issue that at it's root has been caused by changes in our society and culture that have taken place within the last 30-35 years. Especially the "normalization" of gun violence depicted and glorified in media and entertainment, and parents' and the public's reluctance to deal with bad actors at an early age, and in a manner that makes future behavior of this type impossible. These incidents don't happen because guns. They happen because there are some mental defectives in our world who want to kill a lot of people at once. It's insulting to me that the legislation proposed above is even under consideration, because IMO it's pointless.

Most people want to find a "solution" to violence. Some believe "gun control" (whatever that is) is the answer. Another interesting article with more specific information about how passing more legislation would be ineffective--because politicians don't really do any research, and simply parrot and "DO SOMETHING", which turns out to be the passing of more worthless laws. http://reason.com/blog/2018/10/31/neither-capacity-nor-power-distinguishes

"I see what he did there" Question, no info.