rsvRidr
-
Posts
238 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Events
Posts posted by rsvRidr
-
-
What's everyone's biggest con or problems with their current rigs?
6x10 enclosed
Cons: as stated, fuel mileage does suffer (funny note- my dodge cummins maintained 18mpg @ 65-70mph, my tacoma v-6 drops approx 4-5mpg but my friend's Duramax dually went from 21mpg to 12 mpg with my trailer and same load:eek:) Granted I drive like a grandma and pretty much stay @65-70 where as he drives 80-85 the whole way.
It can haul 2 bikes fine with all the gear needed but it can be a tight fit
Now that I have a smaller truck I would like to have one with a lower roof height, but no more than I actually tow it would be hard to justify right now
I really miss having an open trailer for various hauling duties that the enclosed is either cumbersome or not long enough.
Pros: I like the security especially if the trip involves unknown stops/hotels/areas.
I like having the bikes and belongings out of the elements and away from thieving hands.
It doubles as a place to sleep on occasions
During the winter it gets used as a place to store my quad
All of our bike related gear stays in the trailer year around so it keeps everything together and you always know where everything is.
Taking a week or two trip with wife involves lots of luggage...the trailer helps
-
I have a 6x10 enclosed that I now tow with a Tacoma dbl cab. It gets around 14-16mpg with the trailer. The only thing I did was add trailer brakes as the Tacoma was lacking in that dept vs my old Dodge Cummins. I put shelves and a cabinet up front for storage of our helmets,leathers,boots,tools,air compressor,ez-up etc. which stays in the trailer all year. The trailer has Baxley chocks and e-track and both bikes can be loaded/strapped and ready to go in less than 5 mins. Definitely nothing fancy as it was a jobsite trailer in its former life but it does make traveling with bikes (and a wife:)) much easier for me.
-
.... “As parents, they’re going to have to start watching what their kids are doing more closely,” he said.
This guy is a Genius! -
I'm in, maybe the wife depending on date. Thanks
-
if thats real it's BAD ASS!!!
Agreed!
Nicely done:bow:
-
-
1) Health privacy is a law. It can be amended by a bill as part of another law. The govt has to balance the privacy rights of one group of people against the safety of another. The trick is finding that appropriate balance.
I agree, however when one is a danger to oneself or others, all bets are off.
Think, sex offenders and pedophiles.
Definitely a fine line though and hopefully will be well thought out as to protect all
-
I wonder how much the ACLU will fight it now
-
1
-
-
No its proof the AWB will not prevent school shootings.
^^This^^^ ....reading comprehension is strong with this one
Banning guns was and always will be, unable to thwart crazy fuggars from committing violence.
-
Columbine had an armed guard...
Columbine was during the Clinton AWB.....
-
1
-
-
So, you're NOT in favor of reducing gun violence and crime? Got it.
Reading comprehension not you strong suit, huh?
-
Quite the contrary, what I have read is the NRA explicitly mocked the COPS portion of the bill which really had nothing to do with guns. I could understand if they didn't agree with the AWB, but then to go through and mock portions that are non-weapons related just shows it's all a political game. I understand that a lot of bills have additional "stuff" attached to them, but they went out of their way to mock the COPS part of it to score political points because it was a Dem in the Whitehouse. Now all of a sudden, because it's the NRAs idea now, the basic premise of the COPS program is a good idea and they can be hypocritical to score more political points by saying "Obama cut the 'Secure our Schools' funding -- for shame you silly Democrat". Please
Again, I haven't broached the discussion about the effectiveness of the bill, just that it had a noble and good goal of trying to address gun violence and crime... which, regardless of your political affiliation, you should agree with the goal, no? The approach to attain the goal is under debate depending on your political stance and information YOU think is correct, but the goal is noble.
As with the individual mandate in Obamacare, which was a GOP idea back in the 90s, which is all of a sudden a horrible idea because it was a Dem compromise... it's the exact opposite for NRA (which has a predominantly GOP base, lets be honest) which proposes additional community/school policing. It's a good idea because the NRA proposed it, but was a dumb idea 18yrs ago because a Dem wanted it.
So, my only real point is that the NRA is full of political lies just like many other organizations that are agenda-related in nature, so for people to start jock-riding the NRA for this latest press release is silly. By all means, if you like the NRA and everything it stands and has always stood for, great -- whatever floats your Kimbers, but this press release shouldn't be seen as anything uber-enlightening to people.
You win, your kool-aide is much stronger than mine.
I'm sure banning guns with bayonet lugs,threaded flash hiders and pistol grips will prove to be a noble cause for America just like in the past.
-
1
-
-
So, why mention the "Secure our schools" initiative NOW, when they opposed it "some 18 years ago"? The NRA didn't say -- we don't like the AWB, but do like the COPS program... they were all or nothing.
Are you sure they did not. Just like most bills, politicians put some good stuff in there,then stuff it to the rim with shit. Why would the NRA (some 18 years ago)state their approval for legislation that included a ban on firearms and ultimately against what they and their membership want. The question should be,if the legislation was so important why did the politician first try to pass it with an AWB buried in with it.
More community policing relates to reduced gun violence and crime which was the main goal of the AWB, right? So, that makes more sense.Main goal of the AWB, I'm sure everyone has their on feelings on this, but history has shown that the 1994 AWB did little or nothing(depending on what channel your watching at the time), to reduce gun violence and/or crime.
Majority of 'gun related' crimes do not even involve guns that listed in the AWB. But lets pass it again if it will make everyone feel better:rolleyes:
-
Those discrepancies become pretty important when the NRA is basing the foundation of their reasoning for action on them.
I think the most telling was
Some 18 years ago the NRA remarked that they were not in favor of a program that a Dem President supported will he was also enacting an AWB and that is what they are basing the foundation of their reasoning now?
-
And of course after reading the 13pg PDF of the transcript and letting LaPierre get his political and "factual" potshots in for things. Some of the accusations are lacking definition, so -- time to go fact checking.
http://news.yahoo.com/fact-checking-nra-press-conference-185542748.html
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2012/12/fact-checking-nra-press-conference/60261/
As I suspected.
hmmmm.. 13 pages and only 4-5 discrepancies that may not be completely true.
Hell, the Whitehouse has more lies in a 10 minute press briefing
Someone mention Benghazi......
-
Don't forget the Morgan Freeman thing... Need an original cite before we believe this.
What, you don't blindly believe everything that is spewed across the inter webs either?
-
Massad Ayoob 12,DEC.,12
The atrocity at the Connecticut elementary school will not be the last such horror, nor was it the first or even the worst. Go back to the year 1764, in what is now Franklin County, Pennsylvania. The first: during Pontiac’s Rebellion in the wake of the French and Indian War, four “warriors” entered a schoolhouse and slaughtered the headmaster and some ten children. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontiac%27s_Rebellion_school_massacre . The worst: in 1927, a crazed monster beat his wife to death, then triggered a bombing in an elementary school in Bath, Michigan, killing some 38 kids and several adults. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster .
I’ll repeat what I said in the Wall Street Journal op-ed section and on the Today show in 1999, after the Columbine High School atrocity: if we simply prepared teachers to handle this type of crisis the way we teach them to handle fires and medical emergencies, the death toll would drop dramatically. We don’t hear of mass deaths of children in school fires these days: fire drills have long since been commonplace, led by trained school staff, not to mention sprinkler systems and smoke alarms and strategically placed fire extinguishers that can nip a blaze in the bud while firefighters are en route. In the past, if someone “dropped dead,” people would cry and wring their hands and wail, “When will the ambulance get here?” Today, almost every responsible adult knows CPR; most schools have easily-operated Automatic Electronic Defibrillators readily accessible; and a heart attack victim’s chance of surviving until the paramedics arrive to take over is now far greater.
The same principle works for defending against mass murders…it just doesn’t work HERE, because it is politically incorrect to employ it HERE. After the Ma’alot massacre in 1974, Israel instituted a policy in which volunteer school personnel, parents, and grandparents received special training from the civil guard, and were seeded throughout the schools armed with discreetly concealed 9mm semiautomatic pistols. Since that time, there has been no successful mass murder at an Israeli school, and every attempt at such has been quickly shortstopped by the good guys’ gunfire, with minimal casualties among the innocent. Similar programs are in place in Peru and the Phillippines, with similarly successful results.
Some people see the logic in the Israeli approach. Dave Workman does, as seen here: http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-wants-action-regardless-of-politics-after-gun-free-school-zone-tragedy?cid=db_articles . Ann Coulter does, as seen here: http://www.thewrap.com/media/column-post/newtown-school-shootings-ann-coulter-makes-her-case-concealed-carry-laws-69361 .
Unfortunately, in this country, logic has been buried under political correctness. Those in power whose ego is invested in brie et Chablis values that include scorn for the peasantry they accuse of “clinging to guns and Bibles” will never see that logic. Children will continue to die in gun-free zones hunting preserves for psychopathic murderers, and the cowardly murderers will continue to surrender or kill themselves as soon as armed good guys show up…far too late.
-
1
-
-
You won't have seen this in the news, since the media is suppressing it.
The Oregon mall shooter was stopped by a CCW.
Local Oregon news station:
http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html
US News/NBC ran this, but google has taken it off the search engine.
That's it, except for a couple of fringe news pickups. Almost no coverage at all.
Tell me why that is happening...
You have to feed the sheep what they want.
Facts are hard to digest.
Shit just flows right in one end and out the other
-
This doesn't happen in Amish communities...I remember that, and if I recall correctly, the shooter wasn't Amish... he just happened to commit his crime in an Amish school. If he shooter was Amish, then I'd agree with you.
You recalled correctly,he was a local milk truck driver per the report. I thought you meant it does not happen in Amish communities.
-
I love all the opinions of underlying causes... I want a turn
This doesn't happen in Amish communities... maybe we should all go the way of Der Dutchman.
it does... http://www.centredaily.com/2012/12/14/3436113/state-passed-on-lessons-from-amish.html
Crazy knows no bounds
-
Should have 'thrown some elbows' and he'd still have his job...
I like O'Reilly's better anyway,this just confirmed it:nono:
-
I was going to suggest a Savage with Accutrigger too. Never shot a bolt gun but for price it's hard to beat
Agreed
-
Hopefully this not a repost, but I found the book by Fernando Aguirre , “The Modern Survival Manual: Surviving the Economic Collapse” very insightful and in general, a good read.
Here is an essay he wrote about surviving the 2001 Economic situation/riots in Argentina and what he learned from it.
http://www.survivalandbeyond.net/urban-survival-fernando-ferfal-aguirre/
His website
-
Range would be 500-750
Maybe use it a dozen times a year or less.
Looking to spend around a $1000 for the gun and optics.
Not looking for competition grade stuff just a reliable accurate gun for light use.
Model 10 in .308 with a threaded barrel.
With this being your criteria, either caliber would perform just fine. I personally would opt for .308 for reasons as mentioned already (availability/accessibility $$) and for the short action.
If you were going out west to hunt large/dangerous game and/or wished to shoot 180gr or higher weight bullets,then I would favor the .06
fwiw-I have two Savages (.223/.308) and think for a sub $1k rifle they are hard to beat.
While I am not an 'expert' I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night
-
1
-
bifocals
in Daily Ride
Posted · Edited by rsvRidr
Not sure how bad your eyes are but I had to get glasses for reading and anything up close a couple years ago. I never really needed them on the bike till last year when trying to read the dash,gps or mp3 player was becoming a chore. I picked up a set of the cheap sunglasses with bifocals in them and they really helped and do not seem to interfere with my line of sight. I am going to try a set of these this year http://www.aerostich.com/catalogsearch/result/?q=bifocal+inserts&dir=desc&order=relevance in my regular sunglasses.
Getting old sux:(