Had to share this story
 

On 10/31/2014 11:10 AM, True North wrote:
On Friday, 31 October 2014 11:10:55 UTC-3, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:05:19 -0400, Harrold wrote:

On 10/31/2014 9:57 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/31/2014 9:25 AM, Harrold wrote:
On 10/31/2014 8:25 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 08:15:44 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 7:43 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 21:25:17 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 19:52:02 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"

wrote:

I think sometimes we forget that the
majority of Americans do *not* own guns and that majority is
growing.

BTW I am not really sure that is true. I think we may have the Nancy
Reagan syndrome working here. When a pollster asks if people have a
gun, they just say no.

I will not divulge gun ownership for any survey. Why let myself be put
on someone's list? Hell, Harry's database is enough.



You don't have to divulge anything. You've broadcasted every gun you
own and what future guns you might buy all over the Internet.


No, no, no....only here! :)



What goes on in rec.boats doesn't necessarily stay in rec.boats. That's
why I cautioned you, some time ago, not to broadcast your travel
plans. ;-)

What goes on in rec.boats is copied and distributed to who knows how
many web based forums and websites. You need to assume that anything
you say is available to anyone, anywhere who may have interest in what
you do and where you are.




So Harry might be completely justified in keeping himself walled up in
his little fortress. Right?

No, Harry's the one with the 'interest' in anything one says, does, or
where the are, or any other personal information he can glean.

Of course, Don White is right behind. Note how he uses 'adoption' as a
slam against a person.


My, my JohnnyMop..... you're on the verge of getting hysterical about this adoption thing.

My comment was in reply to one of your Moppetts trying to belittle another poster by inferring that he has a 'baby brother' complex.

quote: "Gettin' real personal.. .guess I am hitting a nerve... Like I said
before, it's the baby brother syndrome, nobody ever told you no... "

I simply pointed out that your Moppett was more likely to have been catered to and spoiled because he was an only child and an adopted one at that....
That is.. his adoptive parents WANTED him rather than his conception being an accident. That they got a defective unit isn't the issue...... or maybe it was..mmmm.


It's obvious that your medical expertise was obtained from Harry.

Had to share this story
 

On 10/31/2014 12:10 PM, True North wrote:
On Friday, 31 October 2014 12:59:02 UTC-3, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 08:10:45 -0700 (PDT), True North
wrote:

On Friday, 31 October 2014 11:10:55 UTC-3, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 10:05:19 -0400, Harrold wrote:

On 10/31/2014 9:57 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/31/2014 9:25 AM, Harrold wrote:
On 10/31/2014 8:25 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 08:15:44 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 7:43 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 21:25:17 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 30 Oct 2014 19:52:02 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"

wrote:

I think sometimes we forget that the
majority of Americans do *not* own guns and that majority is
growing.

BTW I am not really sure that is true. I think we may have the Nancy
Reagan syndrome working here. When a pollster asks if people have a
gun, they just say no.

I will not divulge gun ownership for any survey. Why let myself be put
on someone's list? Hell, Harry's database is enough.



You don't have to divulge anything. You've broadcasted every gun you
own and what future guns you might buy all over the Internet.


No, no, no....only here! :)



What goes on in rec.boats doesn't necessarily stay in rec.boats. That's
why I cautioned you, some time ago, not to broadcast your travel
plans. ;-)

What goes on in rec.boats is copied and distributed to who knows how
many web based forums and websites. You need to assume that anything
you say is available to anyone, anywhere who may have interest in what
you do and where you are.




So Harry might be completely justified in keeping himself walled up in
his little fortress. Right?

No, Harry's the one with the 'interest' in anything one says, does, or
where the are, or any other personal information he can glean.

Of course, Don White is right behind. Note how he uses 'adoption' as a
slam against a person.


My, my JohnnyMop..... you're on the verge of getting hysterical about this adoption thing.

My comment was in reply to one of your Moppetts trying to belittle another poster by inferring that he has a 'baby brother' complex.

quote: "Gettin' real personal.. .guess I am hitting a nerve... Like I said
before, it's the baby brother syndrome, nobody ever told you no... "

I simply pointed out that your Moppett was more likely to have been catered to and spoiled because he was an only child and an adopted one at that....
That is.. his adoptive parents WANTED him rather than his conception being an accident. That they got a defective unit isn't the issue...... or maybe it was..mmmm.

You might just try an apology for a stupid comment rather than the
bull****.

You could apologize for calling me stupid first..and I'm talking about yesterdays post.


He calls em like he sees em. Why apologise?

Had to share this story
 

On 10/31/2014 11:57 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/31/2014 11:17 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 09:52:28 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 04:16:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I understand where you are coming from but I guess I just don't see a
big threat to my freedom and rights. I am 65 and have never
experienced
any form of this kind of harassment. Maybe I live a boring life.

===

When I was young and driving old beat up cars, I used to experience a
fair number of trumped up harassment stops. When I was able to afford
newer cars it stopped. I suspect it also happens a lot with minority
drivers because cops believe there is an increased likelihood of
finding something amiss.

A lot of these profile stops happen to minority drivers but in some
places they will harass everyone. (within 100 miles of the Mexican
border)
Rich looking white people, driving around in "normal" hours, generally
are left alone
When I was working 3d shift, I was stopped a lot for pretty much
nothing until all of the Monkey County cops got to know me.



Back in the mid 1980's four of us dressed in business suits were
traveling on I-95 in a dark blue Lincoln Town Car that was owned by my
boss. I've forgotten if it was in New York or New Jersey. We were on
our way to a business meeting with a customer. A State cop pulled us
over, peered at all of us, asked my boss for his license and
registration and went back to his car to "run" the plate and license
info. He then came up to the car, handed the license and registration
back, pointed at the windshield rear view mirror and told my boss that
he pulled us over because of a device he saw on it. He said he thought
it was a radar detector (apparently illegal in whatever state we were
in). It was actually a sensor for a automatic headlight dimming system.



He prolly thought youse guys were gangstas.

Had to share this story
 

On 10/31/2014 12:43 PM, Harrold wrote:
On 10/31/2014 11:57 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/31/2014 11:17 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 09:52:28 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 04:16:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I understand where you are coming from but I guess I just don't see a
big threat to my freedom and rights. I am 65 and have never
experienced
any form of this kind of harassment. Maybe I live a boring life.

===

When I was young and driving old beat up cars, I used to experience a
fair number of trumped up harassment stops. When I was able to afford
newer cars it stopped. I suspect it also happens a lot with minority
drivers because cops believe there is an increased likelihood of
finding something amiss.

A lot of these profile stops happen to minority drivers but in some
places they will harass everyone. (within 100 miles of the Mexican
border)
Rich looking white people, driving around in "normal" hours, generally
are left alone
When I was working 3d shift, I was stopped a lot for pretty much
nothing until all of the Monkey County cops got to know me.



Back in the mid 1980's four of us dressed in business suits were
traveling on I-95 in a dark blue Lincoln Town Car that was owned by my
boss. I've forgotten if it was in New York or New Jersey. We were on
our way to a business meeting with a customer. A State cop pulled us
over, peered at all of us, asked my boss for his license and
registration and went back to his car to "run" the plate and license
info. He then came up to the car, handed the license and registration
back, pointed at the windshield rear view mirror and told my boss that
he pulled us over because of a device he saw on it. He said he thought
it was a radar detector (apparently illegal in whatever state we were
in). It was actually a sensor for a automatic headlight dimming system.




He prolly thought youse guys were gangstas.

That's what we figured. Or drug dealers.

Had to share this story
 

On 10/31/2014 11:49 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 09:14:56 -0400, Harrold wrote:

On 10/31/2014 7:33 AM, Poco Loco wrote:

All of that looks like any given month in Chicago, which has some of
the most restrictive laws in the country.

Why don't the cops use those laws to confiscate guns from criminals?

Because the criminals do not register them.


Don't they know who the bad guys are?

Had to share this story
 

On Friday, 31 October 2014 13:24:25 UTC-3, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/31/2014 12:07 PM, True North wrote:
On Friday, 31 October 2014 12:54:33 UTC-3, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 09:27:38 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


No matter. My firearms are registered with the state. According to
some here I should be expecting the police to come knocking on my door
any day now to confiscate them.


More likely is they would just start taxing you on them. It won't take
long before someone points out how much maintaining all of those
records costs the tax payer and they will want you to pay for it.

I still have not heard of a single crime that was prevented by having
some of the guns registered.

The way they presented here was that it was a safety thing for police.
If they were called to your house, they could quickly check the registry to see if and what kind of firearms you had.
It was supposed to cost $50.00 for five years, no matter how many guns.
Then they made a time limited offer of dropping the price to $10.00 for the five years to draw people in. Note: there were supposed to be serious penalties for anyone caught with an unregistered firearm.
When the 5 years were up they offered free renewals but we had to get our wives to sign a form saying it was ok for us to have firearms in the house.
The current conservative government killed that law. I guess the prudent thing would be to buy up shotguns etc now before a liberal government gets back in and re-instates the law.
BTW we still do have to have a permit to buy guns.



The "permission by the wife" cracks me up.


Yeah..it got me to.
I had to make nice and convince her I still needed a shotgun and a 22semi-auto rifle that I haven't used in about 30 years.
Good thing was that she had given me the 20 ga single shot Remington as a Christmas present while we were courting, many moons ago.

Had to share this story
 

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 12:46:41 -0400, Harrold wrote:

On 10/31/2014 11:49 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 09:14:56 -0400, Harrold wrote:

On 10/31/2014 7:33 AM, Poco Loco wrote:

All of that looks like any given month in Chicago, which has some of
the most restrictive laws in the country.

Why don't the cops use those laws to confiscate guns from criminals?

Because the criminals do not register them.


Don't they know who the bad guys are?

===

They absolutely do but if they stop them without probable cause then
they are racist profilers. It's a no win situation.

Had to share this story
 

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 12:24:23 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

The way they presented here was that it was a safety thing for police.
If they were called to your house, they could quickly check the registry to see if and what kind of firearms you had.
It was supposed to cost $50.00 for five years, no matter how many guns.
Then they made a time limited offer of dropping the price to $10.00 for the five years to draw people in. Note: there were supposed to be serious penalties for anyone caught with an unregistered firearm.
When the 5 years were up they offered free renewals but we had to get our wives to sign a form saying it was ok for us to have firearms in the house.
The current conservative government killed that law. I guess the prudent thing would be to buy up shotguns etc now before a liberal government gets back in and re-instates the law.
BTW we still do have to have a permit to buy guns.



The "permission by the wife" cracks me up.

===

Yes but unfortunately it actually happened, at least for a while.

Had to share this story
 

On 10/31/2014 1:19 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 12:24:23 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

The way they presented here was that it was a safety thing for police.
If they were called to your house, they could quickly check the registry to see if and what kind of firearms you had.
It was supposed to cost $50.00 for five years, no matter how many guns.
Then they made a time limited offer of dropping the price to $10.00 for the five years to draw people in. Note: there were supposed to be serious penalties for anyone caught with an unregistered firearm.
When the 5 years were up they offered free renewals but we had to get our wives to sign a form saying it was ok for us to have firearms in the house.
The current conservative government killed that law. I guess the prudent thing would be to buy up shotguns etc now before a liberal government gets back in and re-instates the law.
BTW we still do have to have a permit to buy guns.



The "permission by the wife" cracks me up.

===

Yes but unfortunately it actually happened, at least for a while.



I used to get a kick out of the guys who bought guitars but had to
either justify another one to the wife or somehow sneak it in. Wives
have an uncanny ability to be around watching you at the worst possible
times.

My buddy and I jokingly provided "consultation" services for this.
Our best advice was to leave the house carrying an empty guitar case
from another guitar known to her from their guitar "arsenal". Tell the
wife you are going to a gig with friends or are bringing it in for a set
up at the shop.

Put the new guitar in the old case and go home. Pick up the case for
the new one sometime when you are sure she's not going to be around.

Had to share this story
 

On 10/31/2014 2:36 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 11:57:26 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/31/2014 11:17 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 09:52:28 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 31 Oct 2014 04:16:42 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I understand where you are coming from but I guess I just don't see a
big threat to my freedom and rights. I am 65 and have never experienced
any form of this kind of harassment. Maybe I live a boring life.

===

When I was young and driving old beat up cars, I used to experience a
fair number of trumped up harassment stops. When I was able to afford
newer cars it stopped. I suspect it also happens a lot with minority
drivers because cops believe there is an increased likelihood of
finding something amiss.

A lot of these profile stops happen to minority drivers but in some
places they will harass everyone. (within 100 miles of the Mexican
border)
Rich looking white people, driving around in "normal" hours, generally
are left alone
When I was working 3d shift, I was stopped a lot for pretty much
nothing until all of the Monkey County cops got to know me.



Back in the mid 1980's four of us dressed in business suits were
traveling on I-95 in a dark blue Lincoln Town Car that was owned by my
boss. I've forgotten if it was in New York or New Jersey. We were on
our way to a business meeting with a customer. A State cop pulled us
over, peered at all of us, asked my boss for his license and
registration and went back to his car to "run" the plate and license
info. He then came up to the car, handed the license and registration
back, pointed at the windshield rear view mirror and told my boss that
he pulled us over because of a device he saw on it. He said he thought
it was a radar detector (apparently illegal in whatever state we were
in). It was actually a sensor for a automatic headlight dimming system.


I thought DC and Virginia were the only states near there with a radar
detector ban but who knows?
These days they are pretty useless anyway because all of these cars
with collision avoidance systems trip them.



It was in the mid 1980's. I don't know what the laws are now.

For giggles and something to play with, I just bought a 1988 Lincoln
Town Car. It's in very good condition with 90K miles. I bought it for
cheap bucks because the seller said it had an issue with the anti-theft
system that shut down the ignition and electrical systems every once in
a while when you went to start it. He had one of those battery
disconnect switches on the negative terminal and told me that when it
happens to just loosen the knob to disconnect the battery and then turn
it back in. He said it "reset" the system.

Turns out it had nothing to do with the anti-theft system at all. The
disconnect switch contact areas were completely pitted and corroded so
electrical contact was minimal. Loosening and tightening it again would
temporarily re-establish the connection but after a few starts it would
oxidize and die again. Took the disconnect switch apart, cleaned it up
and burnished it. Haven't had a problem since.

Car is a boat. It's like driving a couch down the road. Talk about
extremes. Going back and forth from a F-250 Super Duty to the Town Car
boat takes some adjustment.