Dave wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 12:26:14 -0500, Martin Baxter said:

You have the little Yanmar one-lunger in that thing?

Yep. Had occasion to be glad for that bringing the boat down this year. Had
two dead batteries when I tried to start the engine to enter Norwalk. The
hand starting actually works.

Ah, I see. Mine gave up the ghost (if you recall we have the same
boat). I put a brand new Volvo D1-13 in mine this year. An absolute
PITA, the folks at CS did not do much right in terms of engine
installation. But after many hours of work with carbide cutters and
fiberglass fabrication I have really nice set up. Got a 115A alternator,
closed loop cooling, nearly twice the HP, quieter.......

Cheers
Marty

Dave wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:58:57 -0500, Marty said:

(if you recall we have the same
boat)

I had forgotten. You oughta join the CS mailing list. Lots of good
information sharing. Whatever you need to do, chances are somebody else on
the list has done it on the same boat. It was most helpful when I had to
replace the sealing on my ports the year I bought the boat.

You're probably right, but I'm a mighty independent cuss, not to mention
arrogant; seems I usually think that I can figure out how do something
myself without demeaning myself by asking for advice. This is sometimes
a mistake.

I replaced my portlights the first year I had the boat, without advice,
used new acrylite.

I assume the CS mailing list is a Yahoo group?

Cheers
Marty

Dave wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 21:29:38 GMT, JimC said:


please don't tell me that you answered the
question I asked. Because it simply isn't true.


I tire of your schoolyard bickering, Mr. "Avocat."


If you hadn't posted all that BS, and instead had simply answered my
question, you wouldn't be so tired.

Jim

Dave wrote:
On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 21:42:13 -0500, Marty said:

I replaced my portlights the first year I had the boat, without advice,
used new acrylite.

One of the members of the list sent me detailed instructions, including
diagrams, showing how to install the rubber "gasket" material that holds the
plastic against the butyl gasket. Most helpful.

While this butyl gasketing is still available, it's 40 year old
technology, I think that there are better solutions today.



I assume the CS mailing list is a Yahoo group?

The archives are on Yahoo. You can take a look at

http://closereach.com/csoa/listserv.htm

Thanks Dave, I'll check it out.

Cheers
Marty

Dave wrote:

On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 12:24:53 -0500, Martin Baxter said:


In your opinion, does the Second Amendment extend the
right to own weapons to all citizens? If so why doesn't it (or perhaps
it does) extend the right to own 155mm Howitzers to drug dealers?


My opinion would ultimately rest on how persuasive I found the reasoning
advanced in the various opinions dealing with the issue, as well as other
scholarly work on the topic. Since I have not read, and don't intend to
read, the various Court of Appeals decisions on the issue, or the scholarly
works either, I simply don't have an opinion on the question.

As a matter of policy (a very different thing from Constitutional dictates),
while I'm persuaded that private citizens should not be permitted to own
atomic bombs or Howitzers, I think a good case can be made that private and
relatively unrestricted ownership rifles, shotguns and probably at least
some types of hand guns, should be permissible.

But of course this is coming from a city guy who grew up in a rural area and
owned his first gun at age 11.

Coming from an ex-marine, who was awarded a prize in basic training for
marksmanship, your distinction between: (1) hand guns, shotguns, and
rifles (permissible, and protected under the 2nd) and (2) Howitzers and
atomic bombs (not permissible or protectable) is absurd. If the
Amendment is read as written, the reason "the people" are given the
right to bear arms is that a well REGULATED militia is necessary to
preserve the security of the state. How are the people going to preserve
the security of the United States against its enemies today (in 2007,
not 1885) without weapons comparable to those our enemies posses TODAY
(in 2007, not 1885). Surely you don't think the amendment relates merely
to arms that can be carried by a militiaman. Or do you?

Jim

Jim

wrote in message
...


While this butyl gasketing is still available, it's 40 year old
technology, I think that there are better solutions today.


The same could just as easily be said for the 200+ year old Constitution!



Or the 2,000 year old Bible, or the 500,000 year old homo sapien gene pool.

Why not just move to a better place?

wrote in message
...


Why not just move to a better place?


???

Maryland, for one.