What's the Dumbest Thing You've SEEN Today?

[Colin Parkinson]

Considering the conditions of the weapons I have seen at other ranges down there, I would not be surprised if the grip safety was not functioning properly. These guns get a lot of use and wear and tear, with local repairs done on them all the time. My friend went to this range and had  ball firing a full auto M16 and M240. I have been to the other ranges down there and enjoyed myself.
Frankly for a 9 year old kid a bipod MG would have been a better choice. There are lots and lots of adults I would not give a SMG to, full auto or semi. I been teaching my 9 year old to shoot, but only with a custom 10/22, she has been shooting since 6. I would not take my youngest who is 6 to the range as she does not listen and is to impulsive. I also recommend have another adult run your kid through the first time shooting. As a shooting parent you get a tad to excited about their first time and they will listen more to another adult.

Actually I came here to whine about doing my mid-year EPM's, when it's required to have statements like "Excellence through Results" you know it's all bullshit.

 

[George Wallace]

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2014/08/28/21905061.html

Did they need fighter jet to escort plane to Toronto, mom asks

TORONTO — The mother of one of two women accused of disrupting a Sunwing flight to Cuba wants to know why fighter jets were brought in to escort the plane back to Toronto.

The Varadero-bound plane, which departed Toronto at 4:30 p.m. Wednesday, was escorted back to Canada by CF-18s.

Sunwing said in a statement that the two women drank "a significant quantity of their duty-free alcohol purchased in the lavatory and lit a cigarette, triggering the smoke detector alarm."

It is alleged the pair fought, then made a threat against the aircraft.

Milana Muzikante, 26, of Vaughan, Ont., and Lilia Ratmanski, 25, of Whitby, Ont., have been charged with smoking on an aircraft and endangering the safety of an aircraft. They were set to appear in a Brampton, Ont., court for a bail hearing Thursday.

The scary thing is: they can contribute to the gene pool. 

 

[OldSolduer]

Maybe the families of these two f:;kwads should be sent a bill for the airtime of the F18s.....

 

[theforcewithin]

Maybe the families of these two f:;kwads should be sent a bill for the airtime of the F18s.....

Well, maybe just these two f:;kwads. Their families are going through enough having to deal with them!  :-\

Wonder what those pilots thought about the whole thing afterwards!

 

[Transporter]

Wonder what those pilots thought about the whole thing afterwards!

They were just happy to get the "free" YFR  ;D

 

[Kilo_302]

All right everyone. Loachman is providing salient points in a non aggressive way. If you want to engage him, do so in a civil manner.

Boiled down, there was nothing illegal, there was a lapse in judgment and an accident happened. There's no need to get hysterical and running off to self flagellate with knotted ropes.

Leave the sarcastic crap at the door and try stay on the course of intelligent human interaction and discuss things in a mature way.

---Staff---

No. They were actually nonsensical points. We aren't just talking about deaths at the gun range here (as was implied). We are talking about deaths due to firearms. There's no simple answer. The Swiss don't seem to have a problem. But the older I get, the more I think that North American culture simply isn't evolved enough to handle firearms seriously. Own a gun, great. But don't charge money to allow anyone to fire them. That seems...well fucking stupid.

This thread isn't about the "Great Gun Debate" so perhaps we should branch it off here. But inevitably this had to get into "freedom" and gun rights and the role of public policy.

This wasn't a lapse in judgment. This was the policy of the gun range.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

No. They were actually nonsensical points. We aren't just talking about deaths at the gun range here (as was implied). We are talking about deaths due to firearms. There's no simple answer. The Swiss don't seem to have a problem. But the older I get, the more I think that North American culture simply isn't evolved enough to handle firearms seriously. Own a gun, great. But don't charge money to allow anyone to fire them. That seems...well fucking stupid.

This thread isn't about the "Great Gun Debate" so perhaps we should branch it off here. But inevitably this had to get into "freedom" and gun rights and the role of public policy.

This wasn't a lapse in judgment. This was the policy of the gun range.

I'm not going to prolong the pain of advocate and anti. So this will be my last post here on the subject.

However, what you just wrote is nothing but your opinion. As to nonsensical points, you obviously don't have a grasp of the reality of firearms ownership and use. However, your hysterical  ullhair: anti gun stance is abundantly clear  anic:

 

[The Bread Guy]

Sunwing said in a statement that the two women drank "a significant quantity of their duty-free alcohol purchased in the lavatory and lit a cigarette, triggering the smoke detector alarm."

Who knew Sunwing sold duty-free booze in the washrooms?  Beats Ryan Air selling lotto tickets and electronic "smokes" in flight.  >

 

[George Wallace]

Who knew Sunwing sold duty-free booze in the washrooms?  Beats Ryan Air selling lotto tickets and electronic "smokes" in flight.  >

That must be some large washroom on that plane.

 

[Transporter]

All right everyone. Loachman is providing salient points in a non aggressive way. If you want to engage him, do so in a civil manner.

Boiled down, there was nothing illegal, there was a lapse in judgment and an accident happened. There's no need to get hysterical and running off to self flagellate with knotted ropes.

Leave the sarcastic crap at the door and try stay on the course of intelligent human interaction and discuss things in a mature way.

---Staff---

I disagree. None of the points he makes are salient nor can anything he said be considered intelligent human interaction. He compared allowing a nine-year-old girl to fire an Uzi (on full auto no less), with taking a ride in a car or a swim in the backyard pool. The comparison was asinine and deserves to be challenged as such.

I fully support responsible gun ownership and use, but this was a stupid act. Trying to defend it, or play it down as something less, deserves to be called out. Actually, I think comments like those only help to galvanize public opinion against firearms ownership. 

 

[jollyjacktar]

http://thechronicleherald.ca/editorial-cartoon/2014-08-29-editorial-cartoon

 

[Loachman]

I disagree.

Fine. Do so.

I, in turn, disagree with your viewpoint.

None of the points he makes are salient nor can anything he said be considered intelligent human interaction.

As I consider your views.

He compared allowing a nine-year-old girl to fire an Uzi (on full auto no less), with taking a ride in a car or a swim in the backyard pool.

I was comparing the relative hazards. Motor vehicle accidents and drownings kill far more people - kids and adults - than firearms accidents of all types. Insurance rates for drivers reflect that. If there was any perceived outlandish hazard from such range practices, their insurance provider would likely have charged them prohibitive amounts. Insurance companies are pretty good unbiased judges of risk.

The only difference is what one considers "normal". There are many people who consider shooting to be "normal". Many people in the US consider shooting automatic weapons to be "normal". Many ranges in the US offer the experience of firing automatic weapons, and that happens regularly and without incident.

I fully support responsible gun ownership and use, but this was a stupid act.

"Stupid act" could just as easily be used to describe almost anything leading to the accidental death of anybody who enjoys activities that involve real or perceived hazard. This is no different. Would you accuse a skydiver who died in a parachuting accident of committing a "stupid act"? Coaching on a range is normally much safer than skydiving.

Trying to defend it, or play it down as something less, deserves to be called out.

Ignoring reality, just because somebody else's version of "reality" does not coincide with yours, also needs to be "called out". Firearms are more common in the US. That includes automatic weapons. Many ranges allow people to fire them, for a fee. Thousands of people do so, every year, without incident, including children. That, there, is normal.

Actually, I think comments like those only help to galvanize public opinion against firearms ownership.

I doubt it, because most people here are already prejudiced anyway.

 

[Oompah-Loompah@]

http://www.pressfortruth.ca/top-stories/massive-joint-military-training-excercise-niagara-region-ontario/

:

 

[Fishbone Jones]

http://www.pressfortruth.ca/top-stories/massive-joint-military-training-excercise-niagara-region-ontario/

:

Already posted a week ago.

 

[Transporter]

Fine. Do so.

I, in turn, disagree with your viewpoint.

As I consider your views.

I was comparing the relative hazards. Motor vehicle accidents and drownings kill far more people - kids and adults - than firearms accidents of all types. Insurance rates for drivers reflect that. If there was any perceived outlandish hazard from such range practices, their insurance provider would likely have charged them prohibitive amounts. Insurance companies are pretty good unbiased judges of risk.

The only difference is what one considers "normal". There are many people who consider shooting to be "normal". Many people in the US consider shooting automatic weapons to be "normal". Many ranges in the US offer the experience of firing automatic weapons, and that happens regularly and without incident.

"Stupid act" could just as easily be used to describe almost anything leading to the accidental death of anybody who enjoys activities that involve real or perceived hazard. This is no different. Would you accuse a skydiver who died in a parachuting accident of committing a "stupid act"? Coaching on a range is normally much safer than skydiving.

Ignoring reality, just because somebody else's version of "reality" does not coincide with yours, also needs to be "called out". Firearms are more common in the US. That includes automatic weapons. Many ranges allow people to fire them, for a fee. Thousands of people do so, every year, without incident, including children. That, there, is normal.

I doubt it, because most people here are already prejudiced anyway.

Nope, not even close. A nine-year-old girl using an Uzi is indefensible.  Wait until the kid is a bit older and more capable of safely handling it. To try and make it sound "normal" - which it is anything but - does nothing but prejudice the defence of responsible gun ownership rights and laws.

 

[PMedMoe]

Might I suggest the gun discussion be split into its own thread or split and merged with the gun control debate thread?

 

[Transporter]

Might I suggest the gun discussion be split into its own thread or split and merged with the gun control debate thread?

No need on my account... I'm done.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Talk about a  :facepalm: moment.

Malaysia Airlines renames 'Bucket List' contest
Airline accused of poor taste after asking customers what they want to do before they die

By Oliver Smith

9:25AM BST 03 Sep 2014

Malaysia Airlines has scrapped its unfortunately titled “Ultimate Bucket List” competition, following accusations of poor taste. 
The airline launched the contest on its website on Monday, inviting travellers in Australia and New Zealand to submit a 500-word answer to the question: “What and where would you like to tick off on your bucket list, and explain why?”

Considering a “bucket list” is made up of things one wants to see or do before they die, and Malaysia Airlines has been involved in two tragedies since March – resulting in 537 fatalities, it was probably not the most sensible title.

The inevitable social media outcry appears to have prompted a rethink, and while the contest is still being offered by the airline, the phrase is no longer being used. Instead, visitors to its website are being asked to describe what they want to cross off their “to do” list, for the chance to win an iPad and a free economy class ticket.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/11071822/Malaysia-Airlines-renames-Bucket-List-contest.html

 

[a_majoor]

I am NEVER going to Ft Lauderdale, it sounds too much like a real world version of "Death Race 2000":

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/194622/#respond

IT’S COME TO THIS: Fort Lauderdale asks Las Olas pedestrians to wave safety flags at drivers. “Fort Lauderdale is asking pedestrians to try a new way to safely cross Las Olas Boulevard: Step into the crosswalk. Make eye contact with the oncoming driver. And then wave a neon orange flag helpfully provided by the city.”

After waving the flag wait for the "Thump" sound of impact....

 

[cupper]

We may have found an explanation for the rise in domestic violence amongst professional football players.

Beats claims NFL players' DNA affected by headphone ban
Due to an NFL deal with Bose, players can't wear their Beats headphones during televised interviews.

http://www.cnet.com/news/beats-claims-nfl-players-dna-being-affected-by-headphone-ban/

Football is America's most effective collection plate.

No organization does a better job of giving unto Mammon on a Sunday than the NFL.

This fiscal efficiency can, however, interfere with the mental preparation of some NFL players. This, at least, is the claim made by Beats.

Apple's fresh, brash little brother is upset that the NFL has a deal with speaker and headphone maker Bose. This prevents cool-conscious stars, such as the thoughtfully monosyllabic San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick, from wearing their Beats headphones -- as well as any other rival headphones -- during televised interviews on game day.

Indeed, the ban extends from before kickoff to 90 minutes after the game. It also covers training camp and practice.

Beats issued this statement, according to Recode: "Over the last few years athletes have written Beats into their DNA as part of the pre-game ritual. Music can have a significant positive effect on an athlete's focus and mental preparedness and has become as important to performance as any other piece of equipment."

It's an alluring thought that Kaepernick played badly against, say, the Arizona Cardinals, because he couldn't infuse his ears with Beats music and his DNA was harmfully affected.

It's equally alluring to think that, in order for him to project the right image at press conferences, he must wrap his Beats around his neck, for fear that his head might loll to one side in anguish.

It's well known that stars who wear Beats are winners. Just look at how well Brazilian soccer star Neymar, another whose DNA is infused with Beats, did in the World Cup. Oh, wait.

Can it really be that Bose headphones adversely affect a sportsman's DNA? Or is it merely that Beats pays certain players to sport its colors?

The NFL offered this explanation in a statement to Recode: "The NFL has longstanding policies that prohibit branded exposure on-field or during interviews unless authorized by the league. These policies date back to the early 1990s and continue today."

Clearly, there is the occasional commercial spillage during NFL games. For example, Microsoft pays a reported $400 million to have its Surface tablet used by coaches and players during games. Sadly, more than one announcer has referred to the devices as an Apple iPad.

In the end, though, NFL players know that they are entertainers at the circus, there to put their very brains on the line for public consumption.

They can't be surprised that their every fashion statement is interfered with by the demands of men in Brooks Brothers suits.

Still, the ban fits nicely with Beats' slightly rebellious image, which has been cleverly constructed despite the fact that the brand has a 61 percent share of the upscale headphone market.

If Kaepernick and his fellow Beatsnik Cam Newton, quarterback for the Carolina Panthers, play badly, you'll know why. I can just see the protests outside NFL headquarters come Monday.