astrov

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.

Zimzam- I'll send you my tricams for free: You cover shipping or come pick them up ...

good stuff.

he's right you know. Not necessarily the feds either, the local cops will unleash holy hell on you too, just because they can. we live in a time of unprecedented obeisance to executive abuse of power ... http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2004-08-05/news/dog-day-afternoon/full (from boingboing.net)

"Whether Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal and that includes the Politicians and media of our country and the free world!" Nice writing.

"To get out of a difficulty, one usually must go through it. Our country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes WWII)." Nice writing ... supposedly by a Ph.D? Also, OP: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/promulgate

which road was this?

I have nothing to do for the next 2.5 weeks. I would like to traverse the Bailey Range? Or climb some easy alpine rock (<5.9) before school resumes. I wanna go sailing too. Lemme know.

I wouldn't go to the Olys for climbing.

Do you just want to buy my 58 cm? Unfortunately I'm not interested in trading.

http://www.bellsfromeverest.com/ordering.html The bells turned from canisters were being offered in the mountain gear catalog year before last for something like 10 grand!!!

"destroy Christian America" Not too sure here but aren't most people from Mexico Catholic?

not quite sure I can follow the logic, heliophile. anyway, things like this happen because litigation costs too much.

Last summer on the Emmons route one of the womyn guiding the group in front of us dropped trou at about 12 thousand feet and laid a deuce while tied to her rope team. Unfortunately we were right behind, following them up. Gross. Use a bag next time. But the spectacle was free, "faster than you"!

thanks for the link - i'd heard of this case before but didn't remember the specific details Hi Ivan. This is from the opinion's syllabus, so it's more of a coherent distillation of the (constitutional) law than an expression of the law itself. Long and short of it is that if this case is still controlling, your search of the i-pod wouldn't fly under 4th Amendment. The search was not justified "at its inception" since the offense which you had "reasonable suspicion" to believe was going on (disrupting class) was a foreclosed possibility as soon as the i-pod was taken away. Unless you had some "reasonable" (that is, articulable) suspicion that search of the i-pod would turn up evidence of violation of the law or of school code, you shouldn't have searched it. This is not to say that the law forbids a search; rather, just that if the 4th Amendment exclusionary rule is deemed to apply, the evidence of commission of crime you gathered couldn't be used in a prosecution of the girl et al. It would of course be up to you and the prosecution to argue that the girl's reluctance to hand over the i-pod (before turning it off) gave you grounds to believe that it contained fruits of criminal activity. (After all, maybe she didn't want the batteries to die?) I don't really know the cases, or the law in Washington. Hell, I don't really know anything. I just thought it would be interesting to talk about this in addition to the "should we let our kids do drugs" aspect. "2. Schoolchildren have legitimate expectations of privacy. They may find it necessary to carry with them a variety of legitimate, noncontraband items, and there is no reason to conclude that they have necessarily waived all rights to privacy in such items by bringing them onto school grounds. But striking the balance between schoolchildren's legitimate expectations of privacy and the school's equally legitimate need to maintain an environment in which learning can take place requires some easing of the restrictions to which searches by public authorities are ordinarily subject. Thus, school officials need not obtain a warrant before searching a student who is under their authority. Moreover, school officials need not be held subject to the requirement that searches be based on probable cause to believe that the subject of the search has violated or is violating the law. Rather, the legality of a search of a student should depend simply on the reasonableness, under all the circumstances, of the search. Determining the reasonableness of any search involves a determination of whether the search was justified at its inception and whether, as conducted, it was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances that justified the interference in the first place. Under ordinary circumstances, the search of a student by a school official will be justified at its inception where there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the search will turn up evidence that the student has violated or is violating either the law or the rules of the school. And such a search will be permissible in its scope when the measures adopted are reasonably related to the objectives of the search, and not excessively intrusive in light of the student's age and sex and the nature of the infraction. Pp. 337-343."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0469_0325_ZS.html

also, I'll go $260+shipping.

curved in the sense that most cobras (to my knowledge) are curved. (I.e. they don't look like the straight-shafted BD Prophets)

$280 + shipping. Good shape. Famous tools: Featured in "Selected climbs in the cascades". former tools of sean courage. I am having trouble uploading pictures to the gallery so you can pm me with you email address if you want some.

I have the 58 cm one, in pretty good to very good condition ... could you spice the deal up a bit?

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/Study?tid=-1

http://www.cascadeclimbers.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/637931/page/3#Post637931 ... So you're re-offering after putting them up for $155 less? Or these are different tools (no adze?)