Scruit

Blood Money. If the families accept it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diyya

I'm waiting for someone to invent brass knuckles for your elbows. Then all these silly "gun" things will be rendered obsolete.

New Saudi road safety campaign: "Use your head or lose your head..."

I refuse to die unarmed because you're scared i might misinterpret how much of a threat the mugger with the knife is. Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Injuring or killing someone in self defense IS a legitimate purpose. Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Of course, any kind of trap is a bad idea...

Meh. Cheap low-end factory stereo FTW. http://www.instructables.com/id/Car-stereo-stock-radio-fake-out/

I'm the same way. Bitten a couple times as a kid and don't trust any dog big enough to seriously injure me. Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Fatalities. I'm intrigued by the incongruity. Just like the only caliber the original uk pistol ban did not outlaw was. 22, which the knowledgeable amongst us know is the caliber responsible for most deaths... Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

"Ready at hand" is key. In a bag in your trunk is "transporting", not carrying. You can transport a gun without a ccw if you put it in the trunk. Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Troll mode activated... Pit Bulls account for 5% of the dog population, but are responsible for nearly three-quarters of fatalities... 31 dog fatalities in the US in 2011. Given the US population of 311 million, that really is one-in-a-million. That's about the same as the number of shark attacks (36 in 2010) and close to the number of lightning deaths (46 in 2006)

I dunno about that, Scooby can be a **** if you don't give up the scooby snacks...

Would you advise on on my home computer? Or is there epic nastiness awaiting my innocent eyes?

A couple sources say it was an "automatic weapon"

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/13/justice/texas-am-shooting/index.html Details thin right now. They arrested the shooter.

Ban semi-autonomous assault dogs! If you MUST have a dog get you should only get a single-bite small-tooth-caliber dog.

Another thought on weapons, specifically in the car... Consider that most weapons require you to be out of the car to use - however getting of the car in a road rage situation is probably going to be considered escalation. I've seen a few road rage video on youtube and a common tactic of the attack is to prevent the victim getting out of the car, rendering them unable to kick/punch (or even elbow!) effectively. I guess the advice is that if you can drive away then drive away - but if you cannot and are being approached by someone who is obviously going to attack you then get out of the car, lest you be pinned down. Just bear in mind that getting out beings its own set of problems. Unless you have a weapon you can deploy from inside the car...

A lot will depend on the officer. A Leatherman is a tool but could be deadly weapon. One officer may see a knife of such-and-such design as being ok, and another may see it as a weapon. I have a 1/2" drive breaker bar in my trunk, along with a socket and ratchet set that I used recently. It could kill, but is a tool. Whatever you carry... If you can convince the officer it is a tool and you are carrying it for a legitimate purpose, then you're fine.

Should have thrown elbows.

Even if you don't seek any compensation etc, it has to be on file. What if the next bite victim is a kid?

If you rear-end me in a Taho me while I'm driving my Bronco then I'm probably gonna be safe. If you rear-end me while I'm driving a '80s Festiva then they'll be pulling bit of me out of your grill for weeks. Does my choice of Festiva over Bronco reduce your liability for rear-ending me? No. Until i do something that is illegal (and relates directly to the injuries) and/or so dangerous that it rises to the level of contributory negligence, the car behind is at fault 100% It it was illegal to be without a helmet then things could get tricky, but the majority of fault still lies with the car behind. Then they're talking about comparitive / contributory negligence, no-fault states, mini-tort states, 1% liabilty, 50%, 51% etc... It's ugly from that point. In Ohio if they were required to wear a helmet (M/C novice) then there may be a case to argue that injures that would have been prevented by a helmet should be non-recoverable. That's gonna be an ugly lawsuit though. That must have precedent...?

The difference between negligence and gross negligence is up to the jury to decide. Then it's a crapshoot, really. - If I sue for bruised ribs from CPR then I should get laughed out of court. - If the medic is drunk and crashes his ambulance into me as he arrives, then someone better crack out a checkbook. What if the track officials rush the medics to extract me quickly from a stable wreck purely so that the race can continue, and in rush they fail to follow spine protocols and leave me paralyzed...?

So if it has more safety features then you'll let a child play with one, right? It's analogy, not avoidance. The insult, you deserved.

You're good at licking bus windows. Would you let your kid play with a chainsaw? No? then why not ban them?