Geeto67

I saw it last year at some car event on the west side Kevan dragged me to. All I remember is that it was loud.

The news cycle and the fact we now loosely classify them as mass shootings instead of just tying them to the activity of the shooter. That's it. there have been mass killings in this country since there have been guns in this country, but it has only become more noticeable since they went from local news to national. I think we used to call them massacres back then. August 1st This year marks the 50th anniversary that Charles Whitman killed 14 people (plus his mother) from a tower on the UT Austin campus. Did you think he was the first? He wasn't even the only that year (the Rose-Mar college of beauty shooting happened just 3 months later). In April of that same year in my hometown of Long Island, a teacher was fatally wounded trying to stop a student from gunning down his classmates with a shotgun. We are just talking about 1966 here and mass shootings at schools (it's an easier stat to find). I would love to see what the statistics are if there is even really an uptick - but oh wait, NRA is still de-funding gun research. yes we did. it just wasn't national news. The "good ol' days" really weren't that "good".

typically the paint used is called "one shot" http://www.1shot.com/One-Shot/index.aspx . It's been applied over clear since before there were cars (pinstriping is one of the few original "carrage" building art forms still left in modern society). How it will hold it depends entirely on how you care for it. It is sitting on top of clear so it is susceptible to scratches and anything that rubs against it. If you compound the bike it comes right off, same if you rub it with lacquer thinner. otherwise you can get years and even decades out of it if you care for it properly. and by care for it properly you keep it clean, waxed (once it has had time to harden) and don't rub on it too much. The nice part about being on top of the clear, if you have a scratch it can be easily touched up provided the guy didn't use a custom color.

It's a combination of paying members, special interests groups, fundraising, and manufacturers. The majority of the money does come from it's members and from charitable contributions ....but...doesn't that make it worse that the NRA is taking their money and using it to keep them uninformed? I am not saying every NRA member is going to suddenly change their mind, but I have to imagine there are some people that disagree with paying to keep information suppressed from them. this is a pretty good article breaking down where the money comes from and how the recent election years have driven donations: http://money.cnn.com/news/cnnmoney-investigates/nra-funding-donors/ Edit: oops I spoke too soon: http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-industry-funds-nra-2013-1

What is the data they are capturing and how do they generally make the decision to add weight vs restrict the intake and etc.... I have always wondered why they didn't just work of power to weight ratio. dyno the car, weigh it, and then adjust weight until they are all carrying the same ratio. This way the "driving characteristics" of each car remain largely unchanged.

That is kind of the crux - one of the fears the NRA had that caused them to take this course of action was that it went against the premise that you are safer as a gun owner which may have an effect on gun sales. When you suppress information from the public in order to protect the sales of the manufacturers you can't really call yourself an advocate of gun owners (which they do regularly). I sometimes think that a lot of the issues we have in the sphere would resolve in time if more information is shared. Block the information and you have an unresolvable problem.

I totally missed where the explorer went from a RWD 4x4 to a FWD crossover. Then again it's an explorer so it's not like I would have been paying attention but...what a huge bummer. My only hope for the new Ranger is that they try to keep the 2WD version RWD or at least bias the AWD version to the rear. FWD pickups are generally useless.

Actually, the congress needs to stop taking the NRA's lobby money to de-fund the CDC's research on guns so we can figure out what the real statistics are and whether there actually is a gun problem or not. Gun research on any large scale has effectively been halted for the last 20 years, what little is published doesn't provide a full picture of the problem. while I am not a fan of the LA Times, this column does a pretty good job of summing up the problem: http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-gun-research-funding-20160614-snap-story.html

first off....not all guns are banned in the UK. They types of guns banned are: - Fully automatic or burst-fire weapons, which may include some air guns. - Semi-automatic or pump-action rifles that fire centre-fire ammunition (e.g. Colt AR-15) - Firearms disguised as another item - Rockets and mortars. - Air guns chambered for self-contained gas cartridges. - Any weapon of whatever description designed or adapted for the discharge of any noxious liquid, gas or other thing. This would generally include stun guns, or electric shock devices, CS gas (tear gas), OC spray (pepper spray), etc.. Cattle prods would not generally be included, but it would depend on the type. - Firearms which previously fell into a prohibited category, but have been converted to an otherwise permitted form. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/518193/Guidance_on_Firearms_Licensing_Law_April_2016_v20.pdf <--page 17 (but I used the wikipedia summary) What is allowed Are Rifles, single fire muzzle load pistols, antique pistols kept for (historical purpose), certain types of shotguns, and certain types of Airguns. Police are allowed to carry hand guns and tactical weapons in limited circumstances, as are certain civilians with a "need" (like state sanctioned hunters to control the deer population). This is not the same for all areas of Great Britain as Ireland and Scotland have their own laws. If there is one thing GB crime statistics do support: the restrictive gun policy has lead to far fewer intentional homicides committed using a gun, fewer police deaths due to gunshots, and much fewer mass shootings. Whether this has lead to a decrease in violent crime overall remains to be seen since as it was pointed out earlier data is collected in a different way than in the US and also the US has a problem with accurately compiling crime statistics. Either way, GB overall consistently has one of the lowest gun homicide rates in the world. Of the 3 mass shootings GB has had in the last 30+ years, two of them (1987 and 2010) were performed with legally owned weapons. I don't think you can use GB as an example for anything anti-gun laws, but it is unfair to compare them to America. The whole country is not very large by population or geography so it makes something this restrictive easier to manage. Hypothetically If a single state adopted a similar policy they would probably see similar results, but on a national scale something this restrictive would be too difficult to administer.

So how does that work in these kind of arrangements? Do you guys have any recourse? Who sets the release date?

not a puppeteer, more like a drum beating out of time in an already loud drum circle.

I'm not trying to change anybody's mind. I'm not stupid enough to think anybody can "win" on the Internet. This place already has a good collection of vocal assholes, I just find it entertaining adding to the chaos. The point isn't to make someone "see the light" the point s just to get some of the more obnoxious people to say more obnoxious shit because it is funny to me.

nice score. It's a bummer you didn't hold out for the color you wanted. Needs wheels/tires.

the problem with "know your audience" is that it translates to me as the most polite way of trying to enforce censorship. This is a car forum, at the end of the day it should be welcome to all people who have a common interest in cars. Yet the "audience" seems to tolerate very conservative views while vigorously attacking those with a dissenting viewpoint. And yet somehow claims to also want to maintain an atmosphere of free speech. Under that reading clay "know your audience" interprets to assimilate to the conservative viewpoint or GTFO. I don't accept it, car people come from all walks of life, if you can't acknowledge that then just rename the place to "Columbus car people who are also militant conservatives" and you won't have to bother with those pesky liberals and their progressive views. Or get rid of the sections that seem to cause the most controversy. I like this place. It's actually a good resource to get event information and see some good car stuff (though it feels like a lot less of that lately). I try not to call people names, I provide an often needed dissenting opinion, and I try to preach openmindedness and education, and somehow I am like the forum's worst enemy.

I don't expect people to read every word. In fact there are some I know purposely don't and I am ok with it. its there for whomever wants to read it, if someone doesn't hey, no big deal. you guys have some weird expectations for people on the internet. Also I am glad someone found it funny.

so...why can't it be both? The target was a LGBT club for a reason. It wasn't a church or a hospital or a park, it was targeted specifically because it would be filled with LGBT people and the shooters objection was with the lifestyle. I said it before and I'll say it again, this guy was an ISIS operative like my local good humor man is the president of carvel. It isn't unreasonable to think that he picked this target for reasons other than militant Islamic retribution. Was this an act of Terror with ties to religious extremism? yes. Was it a crime against LGBT people? also yes. Don't marginalize the act because maybe you don't agree with the lifestyle or want to emphasize the Islamic part because it fits your conservative rhetoric better.

Because you don't agree with the content, that' the extra level of annoyance. Oh, please, like you are going to take any kind of moral high ground that this place wasn't infested with "king trolls" before (shredder crew anyone?). CR itself doesn't exactly have a saintly reputation and nobody seems all that concerned about it. The discussion about this place changing its image has happened more than once and most of the members agree - nobody wants to change anything. We'll meet. Its un-avoidable. whether you know it or not is a different story. I'm sure you'll find it pleasant. You were not reading it light. I didn't say my jokes weren't corny, but they were jokes. Also I highly doubt you laugh a much of anything, at or with. well I don't really know every one's elevated blood pressure tells. Throbbing erection then? come on, let's not be coy you are responding and in increasingly annoyed assertions and snarky comments. Even my grandpa isn't buying it and he's blind, dead, and died before the internet became a thing so....

what? because I didn't take his bait? I don't think marc sees this as the game you and I both do, nor do I think he has a sense of humor about any of it. He seems "very serious" about his online persona. Actually I don't think clay has given me a public endorsement. Nor would I ever expect him to. I don't live my life in search of validation from others and my opinion is not contingent on what's popular. I am my own man, it matters not what you think of me (esp you marc ). Does it some how matter what I think of you? And I am sure Tim you think my politics suck, it is what keeps the dynamic going. We can keep sucking together (<---come on that's funny right there).

The early car headlights. Seriously there is a whole militant group of Porsche purists who bitch about it not being a real Porsche because of "runny egg" headlights or not being a real 911 because "boxster front end". The complaints about the very plain and cheap feeling interior don't help it either. It was the first Porsche made post change in philosophy from the hand built low production era of the aircooled to high end mass production and increased volume and in some ways it is considered a compromise car. Really it is all just Porsche nerds shitting on what is a pretty good car in it's own right but not perceived as good as the 993 or the 997.

I'm not either, I have been seeing it happen with peers across the industry. It recently happened to someone I had a close working relationship with and it was heartbreaking.

By far my favorite post. Hey Clay, have you had the experience in your bank of re-running background checks and people losing their jobs because of it? Seen this recently where new, more advanced, background checks are picking up some really old things in people's permanent records and affecting their employment. In some cases we are talking about employees with a decade or more with their companies. Makes me really sad.

Others do that here as well, you just don't like it because you disagree with the content. I'm not in every thread. And actually I usually only respond after someone else has posted exactly the same thing you accuse me of. Again you disagree with the content so you are holding me to a different standard because you have never met me. your loss. Cup of Joe has great coffee. At least I said "with all due respect" and tried to keep it light and funny. Enjoying that vein popping out of your forehead right now?

Really, you want to have a political discussion in the middle of Joe's rant about "Kids these days"? fine. Statistics collected by the BLS do include the able workers that have stopped looking for a job - that's called the "Not In Labor Force" and is reported on. This 3mm+ workers you and the EPI are talking about as "missing workers"? that the error rate for the total data set, so 3mm out of 159286000 estimated total work force is a 1.8% error rate. that is what is meant by missing workers - not accounted for in any of the BLS stats (which do account for people not in the labor force). The "Fake" unemployment rate, as you imply, is a real statistic - it is the number of people who are unemployed and looking for work. Your implications that it is not credible are not a problem with the data but the interpretation. Should it be the appropriate focus? eh, I am not pleased about it either, because I feel like it is constantly quoted out of context and you need the full picture to appreciate the data. The "real" unemployment rate is still calculated by the BLS and is still publicly published but is not as widely disseminated. If you look at the rate of change between 2009 and 2015 (10% unemployment to 5.4% unemployment) you see a 4.6% change and a corresponding increase in the NiLF numbers of 3.3% (66.1% to 62.8%). But from 2015 to 2016 there has been a continued drop in unemployment and not a corresponding change in the NiLF number. An there are still outside factors to consider like there is no way to separate a housewife or retiree who is NiLF and someone who has just given up on job hunting - which is why we look at social welfare program rate as well to give some more context to the data. Currently Food stamps and unemployment payments are in decline, but social security is up so - extrapolate from that what you will. The BLS has some great statistics engines, you should go play with it sometime: http://www.bls.gov/ you keep wanting to have a "political" discussion where a facts based discussion is warranted. You seem proud that you used a "lefty" source as if it would invalidate me some how but really it weakens your point because you have an politically charged organization trying to use the error rate to raise ire about social concerns. BTW, my original point was Joe probably didn't look at any of this, he's seen a few real life examples that tugged at his heart strings and his way of coping with the anger and frustration of watching people not be able to get out of their own way is to blame a generation for laziness. Clay: actually I think public need is increasing but in ways we haven't seen before due to advancements in the labor force. Prior to the 1950's having a criminal background was not a bar on employment because it was more common (courts did not have to provide for counsel prior to 1961) and it was easy to cheat the system because the records were hard to get. Now it is a death sentence to employment because our record keeping and sharing has improved and societal change has become less forgiving of an errant past. I don't think the people are changing, or at least not changing as fast as society's expectations on them.

Because you want to read it that way. I think you just don't like me having never met me in real life and crafted some wild version in your head. I have opinions and I am vocal. I never claim to be an expert, nor does anybody else here that usually asserts the same kind of garbage generalization. I imagine it's easiest on one leg, like a flamingo. Tim is dead wrong about a lot of things, and not all of them are discussed on this board. Right now he is pandering and being a little bit of a troll (by his own admission), and neither one of us is taking this seriously and both are having quite a bit of fun with it. Don't get me wrong Tim's politics do actually suck, but this is more verbal sparing and poking each other than actually saying anything of merit. At least I hope Tim's being exaggerated and not trying to be serious - he's said some awful shit. Please, and I mean this with all due respect, go fuck yourself.

That used to be the joke we reserved for Porsche owners. I shit you not my father's long time friend and former multiple 911 owner was this guido doctor who always wore his shirt two buttons undone, wore gold chains, had a perma-tan, and a standing table at Rao's. He was an uber douche. Porsche parts are generally expensive. And its an older car that is a little more high maintenance than say...a honda S2000. Non-turbo early cars don't even make 300hp (296 flywheel hp out of 3.4L) and the later 3.6L NA cars only make 15 hp more. So it isn't "fast" in the modern sense of 300+ 4 door sedans. The inspections on these cars are crucial to getting a good one. A lot of minor deferred maintenance issues can snowball into a lot of nickel and dime problems. If you work on your own cars it's not the end of the world. here is a great article on 996 pre-purchase inspections: http://www.pelicanparts.com/techarticles/911_prepurchase/911_prepurchase.htm This isn't meant as a stand in for a PPI by a shop - just getting you more knowledgeable. It may take you a little while to find one clean and well cared for enough, since the market for these cars seems to be divided into two segments: people who obsessively care for these cars, and a-holes who neglect it for the first 5 years of ownership till they can trade and get a new one. As a case in point - a friend of mine just bought a 2003 Carrera 4s coupe for $22K with 70K miles. IMS bearing already done, PCA member owned, well maintained. It was the boring color combo of silver on silver but not the end of the world. He found the car on the PelicanParts forum, which I would trust more than CL. The only way you are going to know if you like it is to test drive one. so go out and look at a couple of cars and see how you like it. here is one in cincy that is slightly above your price range but the owner has a ton of documentation: http://cincinnati.craigslist.org/cto/5629254453.html Not having the IMS bearing done would be a reason to negotiate $2500 off the price for me (low mileage is sometimes a contributor to IMS failure because the car sits around and the oil drains out - people ask more money for low mileage cars but I don't think it is justified if the IMS hasn't been done).