Best Coolpix for HD and low light too?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: Neil Harrington on 20 Jun 2010 12:06 "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message news:Xns9D9CCACD95C3AJaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... > "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote : > >> >> "John McWilliams" <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message >> news:hvgp8r$8kj$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>> Neil Harrington wrote: >>>> "John McWilliams" <jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote in message >>>> news:hvg9ra$dna$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>>>> Neil Harrington wrote: >>>>>> "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message >>>>>>> Exactly. I'd love to have a nice Nikon DSLR, so I could have a >>>>>>> polarizing >>>>>>> lens and all, but it IS for my purse and I already have a bunch of >>>>>>> stuff in >>>>>>> there, including the XD-45 ACP, >>>>>> Ooooh. My kinda woman. (Though I'm mainly a Beretta guy myself.) >>>>> Kinda like Rita, I bet. A lady but not a woman. >>>> >>>> Really? What makes you think that? >>> >>> The same sorta stuff that made me know "Rita", aka "Larry Thong" >>> recently, was a guy. >>> >>> Were you the one who was so skeptical about my claim re "Rita" when you >>> first came to this NG? I never did get an enthusiastic thank you from >>> the guy whoever he was. >> >> Yes, that was probably me. I was skeptical at first; now I believe >> you're right, but I guess I'll never know for sure. But thank you >> anyway, I guess. I don't know if that's "enthusiastic" enough . . . :-) > > What silly speculation, and you apparently only do this to women who post? I don't do it at all, though I have occasionally responded when someone else does, as I have this time. In the other case John mentions, it does seem to have been a he posing as a she. > > Is a woman somehow not a woman if she likes guns and martial arts? ( > pretty > insulting to the NRA women I've met and the ones who attended the same > dojo > with me ) > > Have you ever questioned whether one of the "guys" posting here, really > was > one? Wanted to turn him upside down like a cat, lift those hind legs and > check? How boorishly inappropriate. This is what drives women away from > posting in usenet groups. > >> I cannot understand why someone would pretend to be female when he's >> male, or vice versa. But I accept that some do, of course. > > Maybe you're not really a man, but actually a cross dressing woman. Who > cares? Are you polite and respectful to people in the group? That's all > I'd > personally care about. Well, excepting pests like the Troll of a Thousand Names, I think I have generally been polite and respectful. > >> What is it about Jane Galt (or "Jane Galt") that makes you suspect the >> same thing, though? I'd agree the name is odd, looking like perhaps a >> variation on the John Galt of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged," but >> that in itself doesn't mean the gender is faked. > > Thank you. That's exactly why I picked the nym. I'm a female Objectivist. > Sue me? Certainly not; I'm an Ayn Rand fan myself.
From: Neil Harrington on 20 Jun 2010 13:23 "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message news:Xns9D9CCF18916B5JaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... > "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote : > >> >> "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message >> news:Xns9D9BC09504A1JaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... >>> "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote : >>> >>>> >>>> "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message >>>> news:Xns9D9A8F95FCC1AJaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... >>>>> tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote : >>>>> >>> >>>> >>>> Ooooh. My kinda woman. (Though I'm mainly a Beretta guy myself.) >>> >>> As in 9mm? Wuss? LOL >> >> Yep. I've loved the 9mm Luger/Parabellum/NATO/x19 cartridge since long >> before it became as commonplace as it is now. It's the perfect pistol >> ammo and was probably designed by God. Not too big, not too small, it's >> just right -- Goldilocks would have loved it too. > > Tried finding any handgun ammo on the shelves at Walmart, since Obama > Nation got into office? It's 18 months later and the shelves are STILL > bare, people are still scared and hoarding. I guess I have enough of a hoard already, and I've got plenty of brass, primers, powder and bullets in case I need more. I haven't shopped for ammo in many years now. Actually I haven't been doing any shooting lately either. > >>> I was carrying an XD-9 for awhile but the guys in my gun group kept >>> bugging >>> me about its lack of "stopping power" ( heck it had 9mm +P JHP! ) >> >> Then it was for all practical purposes the equal of any .45 Auto in >> stopping power, though of course you will never, never, ever convince >> the .45-adoring guys of that. > > I know, so I finally went for the Xd-45 ACP. :) If ya cant beat em, join > em. That's really not good thinking. You didn't join the Obama mobs, did you? > > COme to think of it, I still have that XD-9 around and need to sell it. > <sigh> But a woman cant have too many guns. ;-) I'd sell the XD-45 instead and keep the more sensible 9. Just on the remote chance the survivalists are right and our gummint may fall apart some day leading to massive civil disorder, it's not a bad idea to have something that will accept military ammo. There will ALWAYS be millions and millions of rounds of 9mm NATO around SOMEWHERE. And there will be people who have ways of getting to it. > >> They do LOVE their pumpkin rollers! They >> think a bullet that big just must be best -- never mind that it comes >> out of a basically low-pressure cartridge (the .45 Auto can't handle >> more than half the chamber pressure of the 9mm Luger) and has about the >> trajectory of a slingshot. > > Yeah, but hit a bad guy in the shoulder and the whole arm will be gone. :) BALONEY. And don't believe those silly stories about the .45 having "knockdown power" either. No handgun has "knockdown power" and no rifle does either for that matter, unless it's something like a .300 Magnum being used on a chipmunk. > > You should see the hand of the woman who was running the "ladies night" I > used to attend, at the local gun shop here. She accidentally shot herself > through the hand with a 9mm JHP. What a mess. Havent seen her in awhile, > but she said it would take years of rehab to use the hand again. Nasty business. But I'd sure like to know how she managed to shoot herself through the hand. > >> Read the book "Handgun Stopping Power: The Definitive Study" by Evan >> Marshall and Edwin Sanow. They are (or were) two cops who spent years >> evaluating actual shootings and comparing the ammunition used in terms >> of "one-shot stops" -- actual shootings of people, not just theories >> about the subject or blowing holes in ballistic gelatin. Their >> conclusion: the best 9mm JHP load did the job better than any .45 or >> other cartridge in their accumulated data. Now that was their first book >> and they've written a couple of others since, which I haven't read, so >> maybe that has changed. > > I KNOW. Much of the "9mm doesnt have the stopping power" tales come from > the military, when the idiot politicians make them use FMJ. Well, to be fair, it's the Geneva Convention that makes them do that. Any type of expanding bullet is outlawed in war because it's "inhumane." OK to use napalm or flamethrowers on people, but not expanding bullets. Actually the .303 British in its Mk VII loading had a bullet with aluminum nose cone under the jacket, making the bullet tail heavy so it would topple when it hit flesh, thus comparable to a JSP or JHP in destructiveness, but that was OK because it was full metal jacketed. And our 5.56mm rifles have (depending on model) an abnormally slow rifling twist for that caliber, causing the bullet to be only marginally stabilized and also possibly topple in flesh -- still perfectly legal because it's FMJ. > I know a woman > who had a guy coming at her and fired 7 rounds into him at close range, > before stopping him, because she was dumb enough to use FMJ. > > FMJ is for target practice. For me, cast bullets are for target practice. Actually there are people who for "serious social intercourse" load their magazines alternating JHP and FMJ, the idea being that when and if you have to use the weapon you can't know ahead of time what the situation will be -- the miscreant may be behind something he's using as a shield. > >> Based on the ballistics figures alone, I would expect the 10mm Auto to >> be best in stopping power (with the possible exception of some of the >> humungous wheelgun cartridges) > > Yeah, a .50 Desert Eagle might be amazing. > > For home defense, the heck with a pistol, we got the 12 gauge pump, with 8 > shells of alternating 00 Buck and slugs. Yes, that oughta work. BTW the police nowadays prefer No. 4 Buck to 00, I understand. At close range, even birdshot is devastating. > > Glad we got the Limbsaver pad for it though, that thing really kicks my > shoulder. > >>, but I doubt there's enough data on the >> 10mm in actual shootings to prove that. Next best would probably be the >> shortened version of the 10mm, the now very popular .40 S&W (which some >> wags called the ".40 Short & Weak," but they were of course comparing it >> to its daddy). That does look like a very effective round to me, better >> than either the 9mm or .45, and it's pleasant enough to shoot, but it's >> not enough better to make me switch to it. All my reloading gear is in >> 9mm/.38/.357 and this late in life I'm not going to take on a new size. >> >> I've owned a lot of .45 automatics (all Colts), also one S&W target >> revolver in the same caliber, and liked them all a lot. When I was >> shooting in competition in the '60s and '70s I had to have a .45 since >> one-third of an NRA outdoor tournament requires that caliber (and >> actually most competitors use their .45s in the Center Fire third as >> well). But I haven't owned a .45 since, and have no interest in owning >> another one. I still like the 1911 configuration, just don't care that >> much for the cartridge. It DOES make sense for military purposes because >> of the Geneva Convention FMJ rule, I'll say that for it. But I'm >> satisfied that for civilian purposes the 9mm in JHP loads does at least >> as well. > > Probably right. > >> >>> and telling >>> me to carry a .45 ACP. So I figure if 14 rds of 45 ACP JHP wont do the >>> job now, I gotta call in Jack Bauer. LOL >> >> Jack Bauer doesn't use a .45 either. At least, not in the shows I've >> seen (which were only from the first season). My recollection is that he >> was using a SIG-Sauer, so presumably either a 9mm or a .40. > > Dont know for sure, but that scene where he tortured the russian snipe was > one of the most gruesome ones I've ever seen on TV. > > Still, who would I want defending my country? Or if a nuke was in Denver > and needed to be found? Him or Obama? Our community organizer president is reduced to total helplessness when confronted by the problem of a major oil spill. After two months he still doesn't know what to do about it but assures us all that he's "on top of it." Meanwhile he (a) has refused help from a dozen countries who have experience with oil spills and could almost certainly have relieved the situation at least somewhat by now; (b) is threatening BP, the only people trying to do something about the leaks, with criminal prosecution and has shaken them down for $20 billion; (c) has done nothing about Louisiana's repeated requests for permission to build sand barriers to stop the oil from reaching their shores, while six or more government agencies try to decide whose responsibility it is what they should do about it; and (d) has called a moratorium on all offshore drilling, killing thousands of jobs, as if that region wasn't already hard hit enough economically by the effects of the spill -- and despite the fact that 35,000 or so offshore wells have been drilled before with no accidents or problems. So no, I would not want Obama and his teleprompters "defending my country" from any other serious threat. He is already in way over his head. To all those gullible folk who voted him into office: HOW'S THAT HOPEY-CHANGEY STUFF WORKIN' OUT FOR YA?
From: Better Info on 20 Jun 2010 13:27 On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 01:01:00 -0500, Jane Galt <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote: >This is such fun, I hate to get back on topic, but does anyone know of a >comparison table that compares the features of the G11 and SD4000IS? > >It's kinda coming down between those two. > >The S8000, while having f2.0, is also said to have some slow problems, in >some of the reviews I saw. I don't have any resources of comparisons between the two, but earlier you expressed a curiosity about G-series optical quality. You might find these two links interesting. <http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml> The Canon P&S G10 was compared in a blind-test against a medium format Hasselblad H2. The Hasselblad was security locked down on a hefty tripod, a delayed remote shutter release, and mirror lock-up was used to try to prevent all camera shake. ["The H2 was on a large Enduro tripod with RRS head. Mirror lock-up was used, along with 3 second self timer and cable release."] The P&S camera was only triggered hand-held while placed on top of the tripod-mounted Hasselblad. ["...without a tripod mount for the G10 I simply held it firmly braced on top of the Hassy ..."] In prints up to 13"x19" size professional photographers couldn't tell the difference in image quality between the two cameras. <http://darwinwiggett.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/the-canon-7d/> In this fun review the G9's and G11's images were compared against those of this year's Canon 7D DSLR. The G-series P&S cameras both won. DSLRs are not the automatic winners when it comes to image quality, and haven't been for a long time. In 2002 I bought a super-zoom P&S camera that was beating the images from DSLRs made that same year. The same thing three years ago when researching a new camera for myself. Here's another interesting link where the image quality from a 20x super-zoom P&S camera's lens easily beats out an easy to design 3x DSLR zoom lens. <http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_SX10_IS/outdoor_results.shtml> Do those help to allay your fears about image quality in P&S cameras? Addendum: The G11 may not be the optimum camera for you, but, depending on your skill levels and amount of creativity that you get into, you might like to know that the G11 now has a beta-phase of CHDK for it. This allows you to have things like motion detection to shoot images of birds at a feeding station, unattended; or of lightning-strikes. It's that fast, the shutter triggered on the first discharge to capture the rest of the oscillating lightning event. Or for example, with your ballistics interests you might like to point your tripod-mounted camera at a target and have it snap off a new shot automatically each time a new bullet-hole is created. CHDK's ultra-fast shutter speeds (up to 1/40,000 second actual shutter speed, or as fast as 1/224,000 flash duration on some models (1/60,000 second more typical)) and the 15ms response time for the remote-shutter release (see the SDM build for stereo-pair synchronization speed information) could also be used to stop bullets in flight if used jointly with the proper external event-detection circuitry. Advanced time-lapse scripts are also plentiful for CHDK so you can now do this without being tethered to a battery-hungry and heavy laptop computer to do the same, or an expensive remote release with limited time-lapse options in it. Some time-lapse scripts even allow you to shoot video clips as well as high-res still frames. CHDK time-lapse scripts are quite popular with the KAP (kit aerial photography) crowd, as well as those that mount them to model planes and helicopters. Some CHDK time-lapse scripted cameras have even been sent aloft on balloons to the very edges of earth's atmosphere, taking images showing the curvature of the earth against the black of space. (There's some nice websites with full documentation and images from these ventures.) CHDK's features are generally for the very advanced photographer and may not concern you, but it's worth knowing about it should you ever have need of any of its capabilities. http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page For a fuller list of all of CHDK's features: http://chdk.wikia.com/wiki/CHDK_User_Manual That's a newer compilation of all four of the previous user manuals that I wrote for all earlier builds of CHDK's various incarnations. While there is some minor information that the manual-mergers forgot to add in this new manual it's a pretty complete one-shot overview now. Keep in mind that that user manual does not include all the uBASIC and LUA information where you can program your camera to perform any of its tasks by using simple scripts, written by using any text editor. Your scripts stored on your SD card and loaded individually whenever needed, just like loading up a new program on your computer when it's needed. Nor does the manual include information about composition and cropping viewfinder "Grid" designing, also found on another page. (The complete uBASIC programming sections and Grids sections also authored by myself, as well as many of the more popular scripts.) p.s. Should a troll going by the name of SMS now chime in with his relentless claims of having authored the CHDK Wiki pages (as he does every time I bring up CHDK to others), you can rest assured he's never added even one word to CHDK's documentation. He doesn't even own a camera. The above information is precisely why I know this to be a fact.
From: Tzortzakakis Dimitris on 20 Jun 2010 15:04 � "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> ������ ��� ������ news:sO-dnSv3Mbo604PRnZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > > "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message > news:Xns9D9CCF18916B5JaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... >> "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote : >> >>> >>> "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message >>> news:Xns9D9BC09504A1JaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... >>>> "Neil Harrington" <nobody(a)homehere.net> wrote : >>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message >>>>> news:Xns9D9A8F95FCC1AJaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... >>>>>> tony cooper <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote : >>>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ooooh. My kinda woman. (Though I'm mainly a Beretta guy myself.) >>>> >>>> As in 9mm? Wuss? LOL >>> >>> Yep. I've loved the 9mm Luger/Parabellum/NATO/x19 cartridge since long >>> before it became as commonplace as it is now. It's the perfect pistol >>> ammo and was probably designed by God. Not too big, not too small, it's >>> just right -- Goldilocks would have loved it too. >> >> Tried finding any handgun ammo on the shelves at Walmart, since Obama >> Nation got into office? It's 18 months later and the shelves are STILL >> bare, people are still scared and hoarding. > > I guess I have enough of a hoard already, and I've got plenty of brass, > primers, powder and bullets in case I need more. I haven't shopped for > ammo in many years now. Actually I haven't been doing any shooting lately > either. > >> >>>> I was carrying an XD-9 for awhile but the guys in my gun group kept >>>> bugging >>>> me about its lack of "stopping power" ( heck it had 9mm +P JHP! ) >>> >>> Then it was for all practical purposes the equal of any .45 Auto in >>> stopping power, though of course you will never, never, ever convince >>> the .45-adoring guys of that. >> >> I know, so I finally went for the Xd-45 ACP. :) If ya cant beat em, join >> em. > > That's really not good thinking. You didn't join the Obama mobs, did you? > >> >> COme to think of it, I still have that XD-9 around and need to sell it. >> <sigh> But a woman cant have too many guns. ;-) > > I'd sell the XD-45 instead and keep the more sensible 9. > > Just on the remote chance the survivalists are right and our gummint may > fall apart some day leading to massive civil disorder, it's not a bad idea > to have something that will accept military ammo. There will ALWAYS be > millions and millions of rounds of 9mm NATO around SOMEWHERE. And there > will be people who have ways of getting to it. > Not to mention the 7.62 mm NATO round or the ubiquitous .50 BMG API tracer...(Armor Piercing Incendiary) >> >>> They do LOVE their pumpkin rollers! They >>> think a bullet that big just must be best -- never mind that it comes >>> out of a basically low-pressure cartridge (the .45 Auto can't handle >>> more than half the chamber pressure of the 9mm Luger) and has about the >>> trajectory of a slingshot. >> >> Yeah, but hit a bad guy in the shoulder and the whole arm will be gone. >> :) > > BALONEY. And don't believe those silly stories about the .45 having > "knockdown power" either. No handgun has "knockdown power" and no rifle > does either for that matter, unless it's something like a .300 Magnum > being used on a chipmunk. > I wouldn't like to be in the receiving end of it. Officers in infantry carry the .45 browning pistol, also tank drivers and machine-gunners. >> >> You should see the hand of the woman who was running the "ladies night" I >> used to attend, at the local gun shop here. She accidentally shot herself >> through the hand with a 9mm JHP. What a mess. Havent seen her in awhile, >> but she said it would take years of rehab to use the hand again. > > Nasty business. But I'd sure like to know how she managed to shoot herself > through the hand. A policeman did that to himself in a firing range. >> >>> Read the book "Handgun Stopping Power: The Definitive Study" by Evan >>> Marshall and Edwin Sanow. They are (or were) two cops who spent years >>> evaluating actual shootings and comparing the ammunition used in terms >>> of "one-shot stops" -- actual shootings of people, not just theories >>> about the subject or blowing holes in ballistic gelatin. Their >>> conclusion: the best 9mm JHP load did the job better than any .45 or >>> other cartridge in their accumulated data. Now that was their first book >>> and they've written a couple of others since, which I haven't read, so >>> maybe that has changed. >> >> I KNOW. Much of the "9mm doesnt have the stopping power" tales come from >> the military, when the idiot politicians make them use FMJ. How about the incendiary shell for the 4.2" mortar? With white phosphorus? Totally legal... Or the high-explosive shell for the same mortar, which shrapnel can go to 500 meters? Or the ubiquitous 90 mm bazuka HEAT (High Explosive Anti Tank) round, which will roast the crew of a tank like chicken? Or the Milan anti-tank missile, which can pierce half a meter of tank grade steel? Talking about deterrence... > > Well, to be fair, it's the Geneva Convention that makes them do that. Any > type of expanding bullet is outlawed in war because it's "inhumane." OK to > use napalm or flamethrowers on people, but not expanding bullets. Actually > the .303 British in its Mk VII loading had a bullet with aluminum nose > cone under the jacket, making the bullet tail heavy so it would topple > when it hit flesh, thus comparable to a JSP or JHP in destructiveness, but > that was OK because it was full metal jacketed. And our 5.56mm rifles have > (depending on model) an abnormally slow rifling twist for that caliber, > causing the bullet to be only marginally stabilized and also possibly > topple in flesh -- still perfectly legal because it's FMJ. > Loophole. >> I know a woman >> who had a guy coming at her and fired 7 rounds into him at close range, >> before stopping him, because she was dumb enough to use FMJ. >> >> FMJ is for target practice. > > For me, cast bullets are for target practice. > > Actually there are people who for "serious social intercourse" load their > magazines alternating JHP and FMJ, the idea being that when and if you > have to use the weapon you can't know ahead of time what the situation > will be -- the miscreant may be behind something he's using as a shield. > >> >>> Based on the ballistics figures alone, I would expect the 10mm Auto to >>> be best in stopping power (with the possible exception of some of the >>> humungous wheelgun cartridges) >> >> Yeah, a .50 Desert Eagle might be amazing. >> >> For home defense, the heck with a pistol, we got the 12 gauge pump, with >> 8 >> shells of alternating 00 Buck and slugs. > > Yes, that oughta work. BTW the police nowadays prefer No. 4 Buck to 00, I > understand. At close range, even birdshot is devastating. > >> >> Glad we got the Limbsaver pad for it though, that thing really kicks my >> shoulder. >> >>>, but I doubt there's enough data on the >>> 10mm in actual shootings to prove that. Next best would probably be the >>> shortened version of the 10mm, the now very popular .40 S&W (which some >>> wags called the ".40 Short & Weak," but they were of course comparing it >>> to its daddy). That does look like a very effective round to me, better >>> than either the 9mm or .45, and it's pleasant enough to shoot, but it's >>> not enough better to make me switch to it. All my reloading gear is in >>> 9mm/.38/.357 and this late in life I'm not going to take on a new size. >>> >>> I've owned a lot of .45 automatics (all Colts), also one S&W target >>> revolver in the same caliber, and liked them all a lot. When I was >>> shooting in competition in the '60s and '70s I had to have a .45 since >>> one-third of an NRA outdoor tournament requires that caliber (and >>> actually most competitors use their .45s in the Center Fire third as >>> well). But I haven't owned a .45 since, and have no interest in owning >>> another one. I still like the 1911 configuration, just don't care that >>> much for the cartridge. It DOES make sense for military purposes because >>> of the Geneva Convention FMJ rule, I'll say that for it. But I'm >>> satisfied that for civilian purposes the 9mm in JHP loads does at least >>> as well. >> >> Probably right. >> >>> >>>> and telling >>>> me to carry a .45 ACP. So I figure if 14 rds of 45 ACP JHP wont do the >>>> job now, I gotta call in Jack Bauer. LOL >>> >>> Jack Bauer doesn't use a .45 either. At least, not in the shows I've >>> seen (which were only from the first season). My recollection is that he >>> was using a SIG-Sauer, so presumably either a 9mm or a .40. >> >> Dont know for sure, but that scene where he tortured the russian snipe >> was >> one of the most gruesome ones I've ever seen on TV. >> >> Still, who would I want defending my country? Or if a nuke was in Denver >> and needed to be found? Him or Obama? > > Our community organizer president is reduced to total helplessness when > confronted by the problem of a major oil spill. After two months he still > doesn't know what to do about it but assures us all that he's "on top of > it." Meanwhile he (a) has refused help from a dozen countries who have > experience with oil spills and could almost certainly have relieved the > situation at least somewhat by now; (b) is threatening BP, the only people > trying to do something about the leaks, with criminal prosecution and has > shaken them down for $20 billion; (c) has done nothing about Louisiana's > repeated requests for permission to build sand barriers to stop the oil > from reaching their shores, while six or more government agencies try to > decide whose responsibility it is what they should do about it; and (d) > has called a moratorium on all offshore drilling, killing thousands of > jobs, as if that region wasn't already hard hit enough economically by the > effects of the spill -- and despite the fact that 35,000 or so offshore > wells have been drilled before with no accidents or problems. > > So no, I would not want Obama and his teleprompters "defending my country" > from any other serious threat. He is already in way over his head. > > To all those gullible folk who voted him into office: > > HOW'S THAT HOPEY-CHANGEY STUFF WORKIN' OUT FOR YA? -- Tzortzakakis Dimitrios major in electrical engineering mechanized infantry reservist hordad AT otenet DOT gr
From: Tzortzakakis Dimitris on 20 Jun 2010 15:16
� "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> ������ ��� ������ news:Xns9D9CCB99DC680JaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... > ron_tom <findme(a)someaddress.org> wrote : > >> You basement-life city-boy "males" are so out of touch with reality. >> While staying at a hunter's-camp in the Everglades for a whole winter I >> met up with a gal from Miami that wanted to come and have a place to >> practice firing her .50 caliber handgun. Rounds are pricey so we >> recovered as many shells as we could for reloading. > > Indeed. If only I could afford it, I'd be doing that with a .50 BMG rifle > at > the annual Colorado Machine Gun shoot here. :) > > http://www.rmfcsa.org/gallery/displayimage.php?pid=500&fullsize=1 > > Oh look! Are those women attending? Quick! Turn them over and check to be > sure! LOL http://www.flickr.com/photos/44148682(a)N02/4718346638/ I haven't got an actual photo of the .50 BMG, unfortunately... I didn't have the pleasure either to shoot one, but I had the pleasure to drive the "Leonidas", I even passed the exams for its driving license, following the 1 month course...I even passed the medical, of course. -- Tzortzakakis Dimitrios major in electrical engineering mechanized infantry reservist hordad AT otenet DOT gr |