• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.

PDG

Members
  • Content count

    2,319
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About PDG

  • Rank
    Anarchist
  • Birthday 08/23/1965

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    PNW
  1. Is that Randy's?
  2. I'm gonna go with semi-auto, compact or carry size, and probably 9mm in a pancake belt holster at 4 o'clock. Glock 19 most likely. If she's a metal kinda gal, Sig P229 or maybe a P239, though the capacity suffers. S&W M&P9c or Springfield XDm might sub for the glock. A commander length 1911 in 9mm or .45 might replace the Sig. Cover jacket sized to conceal the gun. She's going to have more than one gun. I'd guess four. She'll have a duty sized weapon that will be whatever she carried in the service as a nightstand gun. Probably a pocket/deep cover gun, which could be a lot of things. First bet is a S&W airweight snubby in .38spl. A Ruger LCR in .327 would be my choice, but she's going to want to stick with what she knows, and the Military doesn't do Ruger, even back when they had revolvers. She may also stick with semi auto, so a small polymer framed .380, like a M&P Bodyguard or a Beretta Pico. Or, if you really want to be cliche', a Beretta Tomcat .32acp in a garter belt. Third additional gun is probably a Remmington 870 express/Mossberg 500/ AR-15 in the trunk. Sounds like a fun gal, when do we get to meet her?
  3. +1 As long as it goes on to add... *oh, wait...I had it cleated. My bad.
  4. Interrupting cow is good. next time try "interrupting starfish". When he starts to say "interrupting starfish who?" clamp your hand over his face.
  5. As has the Brady foundation, Mme Pelosi, Mayor Bloomberg, and several other groups who've articulated that a registry is just the "first step". If only they mentioned confiscation. Is it pretty in fantasyland? Are you saying that registration wouldn't make confiscation a piece of cake? Are you saying that there is no historical precedent for such a thing happening? Because I think it would and there is. Whether the current power-holders have any interest in confiscation or not is irrelevant.
  6. No, but it is the media's fault for characterizing something as so common that I should be afraid to stick my head out the front door for fear I'll be shot and killed. Do shootings happen? Of course they do. Is gun related violence a problem that should be addressed? Sure it is. Are Shootings "common"? I don't even know what you mean by that word. But I know I provide field service for dialysis centers and home patients in the greater Seattle area, including the worst places the area has to offer, and have for the past 22 years. Guess how many times I've been shot and killed? I realize Seattle is a pretty rural Podunk place, but you'd think by now I'd have been killed at least half a dozen times already, what with how common it is... The proliferation of firearms in this country is, in my opinion, a problem, especially as it facilitates access of same to non- law-abiding citizens. But the hand-wringing fear mongering is counterproductive and wrong headed besides. Cars kill more people a year than guns, shouldn't everyone be afraid of cars too?
  7. A tank? Seriously? If I was a cynic, I'd think this was all a publicity stunt.
  8. I think we should be microstamping guys dick's----so that we can nail them to the fuking wall for knocking up women then bailing out and leaving their spawns fatherless.... Well, at least then there'd be an advantage to having a small dick. NTTIAWWT.
  9. Well I think microstamping is a great idea. All new revolvers should have this feature.
  10. Beautiful post, in a narrow-bandwidth sort of way. It won't "end well"? We soon rot in graves or become ash, yes, but you are ignoring the march of culture, the worlds of our expansive sky, matters of frequencies both unconquered and undiscovered, and the matters of the great beyond, if any. Native American primitives cultures called it The Long Journey. Who knows what it is. Physically, you are ignoring our many (instinctual) efforts to make this not a perfect world, but a better world. Unvetted citizens walking about with unaccountable arms is not a better world. Thus the discussion. Well, whatever is going on, it's working. From 1993 to 2011 firearm related homicide decreased by 39% and non-fatal firearm related crime decreased 69% Now obviously, it's either the increase in gun sales, or the AW ban expiring. I just haven't decided which yet... Quit with the alarmist hand wringing and doomsaying already...it's making the wimmin nervous. http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?iid=4616&ty=pbdetail
  11. Meanwhile, in Ferguson... http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ferguson-two-police-officers-shot-after-gunfire-directed-exactly-at-officers/ar-AA9Ga81 More gasoline on the fire. America is a tough place to be a cop these days. I hope the officers are going to be okay.
  12. I never once said that the problem was "too difficult to tackle", nor have I denied any facts you've stated, though I think your "murder-suicide" comments are specious. I also haven't held up any statistics to support my point of view. Agree or disagree, totally up to you...plus I agree with you: Statistics are too easy to bend to an individuals narrative. If I left the impression that I disagree that the proliferation of firearms is a problem, I apologize. It is clearly fuel on the fire. What I did say, and the only point I intended to make, is that as a country we are collectively focused on the wrong problem. Wave a magic wand and make every firearm on the planet vanish in a puff of smoke, I firmly believe that the US would STILL be a violent place.
  13. Boink, I have two problems with yours. 1) The intentional homicide rate paints a (slightly) clearer picture. Sorry, but if you see someone committing suicide with a firearm instead of jumping off a bridge as being a firearm problem, all I can say is that I disagree. 2) Correlation does not prove causality. Switzerland, for example, which would rate much higher in the Wiki list if it included government owned guns in the possession of citizens (military reserves), has a rate of gun related deaths/intentional homicide that is quite low by comparison. In other words, we are not violent because we have guns. We have guns because we are violent. If more time was spent addressing the root causes of violence (sorry, but I don't believe 15 round magazines is one of them), then maybe we'd see some progress. Unfortunately, those are all going to be insanely difficult to deal with. And politicians don't want to deal with anything difficult, they want to be perceived as doing something so that they will be reelected, and that's all. And while I agree that having a shitload of guns in the US is not an answer to anything, taking them away from responsibly armed citizens while leaving the criminals theirs isn't either. It's a deep dark messy problem, it's NOT going to be solved with a quick and dirty gun control law, and quoting Wikipedia stats is not going to change that.
  14. I hope your not a lawyerI hope you're not a grammar teacher. Zing! Ha ha! A little mere negligence with my grammar. I take full responsibility for my actions, though. ;-) This sort of negligent incompetence will NOT be tolerated!
  15. feel free to have that opinion! i have definatly another - the are clearly not good sailors and i repeat the skipper and navigator should go back to school. they are a new generation young navigator who probably never learnt /had to log his position on a paper chart every hour. this is a big fuckup and a mistake like this simply should never happen! expecially with a fully pro crew. i assume the root of the accident is to rely too much on modern technique and to have forgotten/or never learnt the basics of proper seamanship/navigation.and just because most people here are very nice and maybe good friends one should still call this what it is... You can tell all that just from what you've seen so far? Wow. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow. I guess formula 1 drivers who crash never get to drive again? WTF, I guess your shit don't stink eh, Steamer? Yup... When some hack third string bench warmer gets a shot and cocks it up, he gets benched for the next three years. On the rare occasion when Peyton Manning cocks it up, they give him the ball back. Why? 'Cause he's Payton Fucking Manning, that's why. Everyone knows that's how it is, and the only ones bitter about it are the third string benchwarmers. No one would let a bunch of hack sailors on to the shore team of a VOR boat, much less on the sailing team. To suppose otherwise is just silly.