el jefe

here's an opb story on "extraordinary rendition" http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/rendition701/ plenty more stuff out there if you just look.

billcoe, if you are such a great believer in how wonderful our country is, why do you nevertheless feel that you have to own some guns to protect your "freedoms" from that very same country? seems to me that gun fanciers such as yourself actually don't believe in the united states and its way of life, otherwise you wouldn't feel it necessary to be ready to take up arms against it.

fw's posts are increasingly shrill -- must see the writing on the wall for mcpalin.

libertarian philosophy (lack of government regulation) is what landed us in our current economic predicament. libertarian view of human nature is naive at best, the reality is that economic elite will always attempt to game the system to their own benefit in the absence of third party (i.e., government) oversight.

i haven't checked the road myself, but the forest service has this posted at their website: Order No. MH-2008-11 AREA CLOSURE FIRE MOUNT HOOD NATIONAL FOREST HOOD RIVER RANGER DISTRICT ORDER Effective at 0001 hours on Friday, October 10, 2008 and pursuant to 36 CFR, Sec. 261.50 (A) & (B), the following acts are prohibited on the area shown in “exhibit A” and including sites as described in “exhibit B”. This is designated as the Gnarl Ridge Fire Closure Area and remains in effect until rescinded. 1. Being in or upon a closed area. [36 CFR 261.52(E)] 2. Use of vehicles off National Forest System Roads [36 CFR 261.56] Pursuant to 36 CFR 261.50 (E) the following persons are exempt from these prohibitions: 1. Persons with a permit, waiver or contract specifically authorizing the prohibited act or omission. 2. Any Federal, State or local officer, or member of an organized rescue or fire fighting force in the performance of an official duty. This order rescinds and replaces Order # MH-2008-10 signed on September 29, 2008. Done at Sandy, Oregon this 9th day of October, 2008. ______________________________ GARY L. LARSEN Forest Supervisor Mt Hood National Forest Violations of these prohibitions are punishable by a fine of not more than $5,000 for an individual or $10,000 for an organization, or imprisonment for not more than 6 months, or both. (16U.S.C. 551, and 18 U.S.C. 3559 and 3571)

i'm interested, but access to these routes is somewhat more involved owing to the current closure of the cloud cap road and tilly jane trails.

for that matter, you've even registered your children -- i'm assuming they have birth certificates and social security numbers, that is.

why would the government need to confiscate your guns if they know where they are? it would demonstrate that you aren't in possession of illegal weapons and make it easier for law enforcement officers to determine whether a weapon was used in the commission of a crime. if your guns are clean, then so are you in all likelihood. if not, then you've got some explainin' to do. now, i've answered your question so you answer mine: what are you so afraid of? why not register them? you've registered your vehicles and the deed to your house, why not weapons that are potentially lethal to your neighbors and fellow citizens?

take the photo again with the heads equal to each other (instead of the tips) and with a ruler lying across the screws 2"-3" from the head and your understanding of the relative strengths of screws will be clarified. when a screw of ANY length is loaded in a fall, a stress cone of roughly that 2"-3" depth collapses around the tube. the threads BEYOND the cone are what keeps the screw in the ice - for a 10cm screw, that could be as little as 2cm-3cm. a 13cm screw retains about 6cm-8cm of 'bite'; 16cm-17cm 'standard' screws retain nearly 10cm of bite; and 'long' 21cm-22cm screws 'bite' for 2/3 of their length. but it turns out this 'extra' length is irrelevant - a length of 15cm-17cm gives holding power as good as it gets. as for falls, i swore in the early days never to take a lead fall on ice - but i didn't manage to keep my word. i pitched off an icebulge on the west lion one winter a long time ago when a tool slipped and i barn-doored off - went maybe 30 ft - held by a 6" salewa in solid water-ice. and i fzcked up getting in and out of a set of borrowed wrist leashes on borrowed tools on louise falls once - went maybe 6m or 8m, held by (probably, as i recall the times) an old-style chouinard screw. oh, and i pitched off one more time, but screws didn't come into play. tried Shreddie back in the FA season, pulled both tools outa manky windowpane crap about 2 body-lengths up, landed flat on my back on the start-point ice ledge. probably for the best... coulda gotten hurt if i'd gotten higher... screws don't ALWAYS work... cheers, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, i believe we've found the winning entry.

The status quo--as of today--is just fine with me. You OK with that? Which guns legal today do you think should be banned? how about all guns legal today have to be registered? Nope. What would the point of that be? why not? where's the harm?

The status quo--as of today--is just fine with me. You OK with that? Which guns legal today do you think should be banned? how about all guns legal today have to be registered?

interesting. last week she broke with mccain on the gay marriage issue (he's for letting the sates decide, she came out for a constitutional amendment banning it), and i figured that meant she has already figured that obama is going to win and is positioning herself to run in 2012. looks more and more like this is the case. repubs are (i hope!) headed to defeat.

Fortunately, my position is protected in the Bill of Rights from nut jobs like you. The fact that you live in Portland doesn't help your case regarding "strange". actually, bedwetter, the second amendment reads as follows: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. my argument hinges on the first part, yours on the latter part. as usual, the founding fathers left it all muddled up for us. right now the supremes back you, but if the configuration of the court changes...

yes, tacoma is sooo much more desirable. if i lived there, then i, too, could boast that i live in the town that spawned the famed serial killer ted bundy. by the way, portland is "weird", not "strange".

hey bedwetter, the fact that fondling a handgun gives you a hardon doesn't mean that i'm the one who is "strange"...

responsible gun owners would be in favor of regulating firearms, just the way responsible drivers are in favor of laws against driving intoxicated and mandatory auto insurance provisions. if you are opposed to regulating firearms, then you are an irresponsible gun owner. it isn't difficult. i'm not opposed to the idea of people owning guns, but i am fed up with the nra/gun nut position that gun owners shouldn't be subject to any sort of regulation or oversight because the fact that they own guns somehow protects my freedom. my point is that there's no "light" to shed on this issue if gun owners are going to insist that we all just have to trust them to be responsible, period, and can't ask that they register or account for their firearms in any way. look at this thread, there's no conversation gin on here, no give and take of ideas. the gun people just keep saying that any restriction/regulation/registration/whatever of firearms is unacceptable. nothing anyone says, no matter how reasonable (e.g., should nuclear weapons be off limits? how about fully automatic weapons?) is going to make them budge one millimeter from their extreme stance, so why bother talking to them about it?

gun nuts are just nuts when it comes to guns, so there's no point in discussing the subject because they aren't capable of being reasonable about it. they like guns and want their guns because they just like things that shoot projectiles and they aren't capable of conceiving of any situation where any limitation, registration or regulation of guns is or would be acceptable because they just like guns and that's the end of it. a pile of dead kids at an elementary school won't change their minds because they are impervious to evidence or reason when it comes to their passionate love of guns. thousands of people killed by guns every year doesn't change their minds or even raise the vaguest hint of a doubt in their minds because they just want guns. their arguments in favor of unfettered, uncontrolled gun ownership are just bullshit and it doesn't matter because those arguments aren't the reason why they own guns. they don't own guns because they are concerned about protecting everyone from potential government tyrany, they just like shooting guns and that's it, and any form of so called rational argument they use to justify their passion is just a verbal smokescreen. talking to inanimate objects is a more fruitful use of one's time than debating guns with gun nuts because they'll never give one millimeter of ground no matter how unreasonable they are being because they are just so in love with guns. guns are for killing, plain and simple, and handguns are guns specially designed for killing humans.

nice picture of billcoe at beacon, alpinfox. i feel safer already...

i agree, josephh. guns aren't relevant anymore especially since there are so many of them in the world. losing our right to privacy is how we will lose our freedom in the 21st century age of information. people who think owning a gun somehow protects their freedom are living with a very false sense of security.

guns don't matter, billcoe. we're in the 21st century -- the information age -- and the foundation of any freedom now is the right to privacy. we should all be much more upset about the bush administration having engaged in surveillance of u.s. citizens without any sort of oversight by the judicial branch. guns are the source of political power but the world is full of guns and the government has many more and much more powerful guns than you and your neighbors have, so the fact that you've got a gun and think it matters somehow means you're the one who has settled for "perceived safety". your guns won't protect you when someone decides to wiretap you and read your emails, then send you off somewhere for interrogation.

just kidding. girth-hitched chickenheads make great pro, and the chickenheads on outer space are unbelievable.

i had a feeling that was the route. nice anchor. you must have had great confidence in your second.

which route were you guys climbing?

as noted in another thread, there is more than sufficient evidence of brain damage among climbers in the postings found on this website...

i would have thought that there was ample evidence of brain damage among climbers here at this website: just check any one of the political discussions raging right now in "spray" and you'll see more than sufficient evidence of impaired executive functions, etc.