astrov

glue his phone into the handset. He won't know until he has an incoming call

Mountaineering.Club@Dartmouth.edu if you e-mail a request they'll send it out to the whole list. plenty o'climbers ...

gentlemen, here's some perspective on violence in the Old Testament: http://www.thebricktestament.com/

And here I thought it was class I or II.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

bill- check pm's. I accepted the offer you made for the package. - I

I hope the cheery smiles on the group photo belie their sadness

Bill- Let me call OMC / US outdoor and find out about re-heating those liners so they'll fit me. I'm interested in the whole package. Seeing as they haven't opened yet, I haven't been able to call.

PM sent

ah yes, the "warehouseman's lien"

sick ... have any more photos of this trip online on photobucket or something?

thanks for the warning, Fairweather. the boots worked fine. They put me on a 200cc bike; it was the biggest they had. Almost everyone else was on a 125cc. Bear in mind I'm in Oregon, not Washington ...

mattp, you're generally right, and I appreciate your reasoned style. In fact, the insanity defense applicable in each case varies by jurisdiction. In a majority of jurisdictions in the US, it's still the "M'Naghten" test, and it appears from the seattle times article that M’Naghten is the law in washington state. Under the "M'Naghten" test, there are two ways for the defendant to succeed in his excuse: show that he was unaware of what he was doing while he did it, or show that while he did it he was unable to discern right from wrong apropos the act he committed. This standard is mentioned in the Times article. There are several alternative insanity defenses. Arizona has one that particularly hard for defendants. Apart from what Matt said: Since the insanity defense is an "excuse" defense, the legislature may place the burden of persuasion on either the defense or the prosecution in a criminal trial. I don't know the law in Washington, but in this trial the prosecution may have borne the burden of proving to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt (or some other standard- maybe only by "clear and convincing" evidence) that the defendant was sane. So we can't assume that the jury was hung solely because the defense lawyers were being conniving and manipulating words. It's possible that psychiatric testimony from both sides put a reasonable doubt in the jurors' minds about the defendant's sanity- and there's nothing "fucked up" (or whatever) about this unless you're not willing to concede the existence of insanity. On a personal level, I have a friend from college who has been clinically diagnosed with schizophrenia and bi-polar disorder. His father has both too. At times, his behavior is certifiably insane. There is no question about it, since there’s no disagreement among the psychiatrists who require him to stay in the hospital during his episodes. While I would want "justice to be done" if he ever did something to hurt someone else, I would want an insanity defense available to him because he is truly capable of insane behavior at times. It's not an affectation. I suggest getting to know someone certifiably "crazy" before writing off the insanity defense wholesale. Lastly, the insanity defense is an "excuse" defense. An acquittal by reason of insanity doesn't seek to justify the action; it just says that the actor was in such a state of mind as to render it impossible to adjudge him guilty in our scheme of criminal law. Our system of criminal law would lack credibility if it punished incompetents- minors, the insane, automatons indiscriminately, since guilt is founded on “mens rea”. (Culpable mental state.) A fortiori if you're "insane" (it's a legal term) you cannot be culpable. You cannot form culpable mental states. The consequences of NGRI are not pretty- likely involuntary commitment in an institution for the criminally insane. The defendant can be kept there for longer than he would have been kept in jail, too. And let it be known that I’m not defending the defendant in this case. I’m suggesting that the institution and the “insanity defense” (I use the term colloquially) have more legitimacy than this outcome may suggest to an uncritical observer. I agree that what the defendant did was horrible and I feel sorry for the victims. And as someone said in the Times article, loading up a rifle and driving across the mountains suggests premeditation. Willful, deliberate, and premeditated murder should rightly be punished as first degree murder.

I know some of you ride ... Whidbey, et al. I'm gonna take the Basic Rider training course tomorrow. I need some boots as I threw away my hiking boots last summer (they had disintegrated). However, I do have some full-shanked nepal sportiva extreme "Tops" for ice climbing. Could I use a full-shank boot or would it be too difficult to shift? Could Chouinard shift in ice climbing boots? Never ridden before so I confess ignorance

that's too bad, I preferred the gapers and church groups to drive to the upper trailhead so at least the bottom mile of the trail was peaceful ...

"All the old school guys like Fred Beckey keep tabs on him. All the nameless alpinists in the northwest have watched him come up." hey! that smarts.

when? I could be down if it could be done in a weekend a month from now.

how much did (my old) vipers go for?

Sorry jclark, I think you'd be more credible if you'd been tortured.

"All we've been able to ascertain from the satellites is that the one trillion dollar bill isn't on the roof."

buy low, sell high, eh?

Chad- I have some useful information for you. Pm me your email address (I've misplaced it) and I'll send it over.

La Sportiva Nepal "Tops". Fully rigid sole for ice climbing. Fits street size 12-13. (the Mono number has been worn off.) $80 obo. Charlet Moser Grade 8 crampons. (Also fully rigid.) I also have some monopoints for these and a OR hard-backed carrying case I will include. $80 obo. After I used them, I would always clean them off and re-oil them. Hence, they supple, not rusty or gnarly. I used them only on ice- never dry tooled. I don't remember ever having to sharpen them, either.

$275! As you can see they're in good shape, and I have a spare hammer. I'm in portland, but I'll be coming back to tacoma for thanksgiving and could deliver to seattle then. If you cover shipping, I'll ship them too you. Will consider possible trades for scuba gear. I'm going to put some boots and crampons up for sale shortly. PM me if interested.

Yes, but if Seller is going to play the game like this he never should have promised to reserve the items for Buyer. By promising to sell to Buyer, Seller was granting an option. An option is a bar to Seller's ability to revoke (by selling to a more attractive buyer). Among merchants, options don't need to be supported by sham consideration to be valid under UCC 2-205. This means that the option was valid even though it came at no cost to Zimzam ... if we pretend that Buyer and Seller are merchants, arguendo.