text:
Can We Talk About Guns?
Timothy Egan at the NY Times opined yesterday about the instant attack that rains down on anyone who dares ask whether more control of certain types of weapons is a good idea for the US. As he puts it, "The gun gag rules." He details the immediate hostile response to sportscaster Bob Costas when he speculated that Kassandra Perkins and/or her murderer, Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Jovan Belcher, might be alive if guns were not so readily available. We tolerate a staggering level of gun violence in the US. According to the CDC' 2009 data, something like 104,000 people get shot every year, and more than 31,000 killed. (That figure includes nearly 19,000 suicides.) In my city of Oakland, CA, more than 2000 people were shot in 2011. There was an increase of 17% in reported incidents of gun violence from 2010, and that was up from the prior year. Part of what OPD used to do more of before harsh staffing cuts was to get guns off the streets.OK, let me draw some distinctions. First, most of the guns used in street violence aren't legal--however, a PBS Frontline report links street guns to various kinds of shenanigans in the under-regulated legal gun market, with straw purchases leading the list. How we deal with legal guns affects the availability of illegal guns. Even states with tough gun laws like CA are easily flooded with available weaponry from nearby states. Second, there's a place for guns in the world. For example, a rifle or shotgun is, I think, a reasonable tool on a farm. But on the street in Oakland?Third, let's not ignore other aspects of violence. Kassandra Perkins was a victim of domestic abuse--but having a gun handy made that a deadly situation. Here's some data posted at the New Yorker by Amy Davidson:
According to the Justice Departments National Institute of Justice, The data are clear: More incidents of murder-suicide occur with guns than with any other weapon. In 591 murder-suicides, 92 percent were committed with a gun. States with less restrictive gun control laws have as much as eight times the rate of murder-suicides as those with the most restrictive gun control laws. Another study found that the mere presence of a gun in the house increased the chance that domestic violence would escalate to murder six fold.
But finally, this is, I think a cultural issue. The US is not the most homicidal nation on earth, (as of 2011, El Salvador leads that sad list, followed by iraq and Jamaica,) but we lead the pack among wealthy nations. Shouldn't this be an issue the churches lead on? Some, indeed, are stepping up, especially those in cities decimated by gun violence. The Catholic Church's leadership HAS spoken against private ownership of guns and for better gun regulation, including the USCCB as recently as 2000. Perhaps now is a good time for a reminder that the flood of guns onto our streets and in our homes is a hazard to all of us. Our cultural tolerance of ubiquitous guns is killing us. If nothing else, perhaps one memorial we might offer for the memory of Kassandra Perkins is to begin to talk about guns in our culture, and what we can do to change things.
About the Author
Lisa Fullam is professor of moral theology at the Jesuit School of Theology at Berkeley. She is the author of The Virtue of Humility: A Thomistic Apologetic (Edwin Mellen Press).
56 comments
- All
- Editor Featured
I'm glad the question is raised here, though I have no solution. It may well be that gun laws are ineffective means of controlling the appalling rates of gun violence in our country. Effective or ineffective, most politicians seem scared to take them on. I imagine that Ann Olivier, Crystal Watson, and some others are correct in locating the central problem less in the control of firearms and more in the violence of so much of our popular culture. But I think that many people -- and our organs of opinion, and so forth -- are even more fearful of taking such violence on, afraid that even to raise the question will label them as Pecksniffian (to say nothing of first amendment concerns).
Fox's O'Reilly told Bob Costas that he, O'Reilly, would have liked to have his own gun if he was attending the Aurora Co massacre so he could have taken down the shooter.A Catholic college grad, who thinks he's too big [in more ways then one] to duck behind a seat.
The common refrain is that guns are for 'protection'. If we could just kill that myth with the truth: guns are for killing, we might just go a long way to reducing the violence. The fact is that a gun in the home is much more likely to kill someone you know than an unknown malefactor.
Clergy in Flint, Michigan, which is beset with gang and gun violence and murders, have not let the grass grow under their feet in addressing these problems in the pulpit, with rallies, with awareness efforts, with neighborhood watches, and with very few resources. Pastor Robert McCathern is typical of many clergy trying to lead these grass roots efforts: http://www.abc12.com/story/16592563/flint-pastor-starts-new-program-for-... are especially grim in Flint as financial straits in the city have cut police and other emergency services to frighteningly low levels.
Lisa --Thank you for asking this question. Yes, the churches need to be more involved. In New Orleans Abp. Aymond has ordered that we pray a special prayer at the end of Sunday Masses for peace in the city. It is now a regular part of Mass. This will help, no doubt. But more needs to be done, and some is being done, especially among the most disadvantaged. I think that gun control, while necessary, just treats a symptom, not a cause, and we need to recognize that crime is not a problem only of the very poor. I'm middle class, and in my lifetime, beginning in the 60s, I've known seven people who have been murdered and all of the victims were middle class. They include a lawyers, a hair-dresser, a restaurant manager, two businessmen, and two professors. Apparently only one was killed by a poor kid off the street. I'll grant you that that is more than most people have known. But it convinces me that it's the whole culture -- including us, the middle class -- that is violence prone. It's not just youth in the slums who lack opportunity for decent employment. So we desperately need to ask why we're violence prone.Years ago a psychologist friend who was an expert in children-and-violence told me that ALL of the psychological studies had shown that the more people see of violence, even if the violence is just pretend, the more they are inclined to be violent themselves. Is this a matter of becoming sensitized to it? Or of becoming addicted to it? Does it really make very much difference why? The amount of violence on TV and in movies is undoubtedly a major cause for the use of guns by ordinary people.What to do? Obviously, reduce the amount of violence in the media. I don't know how to do it except to make violent acts which don't further a plot to be illegal.Yes, this would entail great First Amendment issues. But we also have an even more important constitutional right, the right to life. Yes, this is also an artistic issue, and art is notoriously subjective. But it really isn't *entirely* subjective. We know that some art, by showing violence rather than saying that the violence happened, does much more than further a plot -- it indirectly increases real violence in the community. (We've suspected that at least since the Greeks.) I'm convinced if the literature professors and critics put their minds to it they could figure out ways to measure unnecessary violence in the media.Yes, there are other reasons for the violence, sociological ones. The causes include poor education, few job opportunities, the demise of the two-parent family, etc. We also know something about what to do about those causes. I say that the churches need to help motivate us to actually spend the money necessary to solve the problem of poor education. But what to do about the demise of the family, who knows?At any rate, I say treat the causes not just the effects.
Some of the role-playing computer and video games are pretty violent as well .... The 10 Most Violent Video Games of All Time.
Those minority groups least able to protect themselves have but a single tool to use to level the playing field: Firearms. Women, elderly, the poor, and disabled persons have an absolute need to have access to inexpensive firearms and training. To suggest that the good citizens of Oakland have no need to own/possess firearms is to turn away from the principles upon which this nation was founded: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..."LIFE. If we have a right to life, then we certainly have the right to defend our lives. Indeed, the civil right of self defense is THE most fundamental of all civil rights. If we are not able to keep ourselves alive, the rest of our civil rights are certainly meaningless. Recent US Supreme Court decisions have affirmed the the civil rights to Keep and Bear arms for self defense ARE fundamental individual civil rights. Civil rights that we are all created with and that the 2nd Amendment was put in place to protect from government intrusion. These are the facts and they are in support of the very foundation upon which our nation was founded. Now, we have the author of this article trying to tell us that the minority groups who most desperately need to be able to defend their lives shouldn't be able to exercise their fundamental individual civil rights? Why on earth would someone in 2012 actively suggest the oppression of civil rights of minority groups?
Why do gun grabbers project their lack of self control onto the good and decent law abiding firearms owners? It's pretty simple. If you don't want a gun, don't buy one. If you don't want anyone but the gov't and the criminals to have guns, move to any number of countries that deprive their citizens or subjects of the natural right to self defense.
Yes, we can talk about guns. But only if it is an intelligent informed discussion, not one based on nothing but ignorance and emotion. Unfortunately the latter is the discussion the author here wants to have. Twice now, in 2002 and in 2006, reputable national scientific organizations with an anti-gun bias, the CDC and the National Academy of Sciences, have done extensive reviews of the peer-reviewed literature on the effects of gun control laws. In both cases what these groups found, and reported, is that, out of the hundreds of such studies, there is not even one single legitimately conducted study in the literature that has ever found any reduction in violent crime from any gun control law or set of laws. Not even one, ever. And, according to the lowest estimate by the CDC, guns are used by citizens 200,000 times a year to defend themselves, more than 10 times as often as they are to kill illegally. Anyone who looks at that figure and doesn't understand that guns are not the cause of violence in the US, or still insists that gun control and the limitation of Second Amendment rights should be any part of our discussion, just isn't qualified to be a part of an intelligent informed discussion on the subject. And if you're too confused by academic studies of the question, you can simply look at the situation as it has existed in the US for the last 20 or so years. During that time we have seen a tremendous decrease in gun control. 20 years ago, the number of states that had any statutory allowance for private citizens to carry concealed handguns in public for self-defense was only a tiny fraction. And most of those only really allowed it on paper, while in reality denying their license or permit to all but the wealthy and politically connected (as described in their own city quite well just earlier this year by none other than the notoriously anti-gun New York Times). Today, every state except one, Illinois (which has one of the highest violent crime rates and murder rates, with Chicago barely behind DC for the #1 position), allows some form of licensure for carrying a concealed handgun in public for self-defense, and the vast majority of them either are 'shall-issue', meaning that by law they must issue a license to any applicant who meets the basic requirements, or they don't require any license at all. And what has been the result? Blood in the streets, as predicted by all the hand-wringing anti-gun zealots? No (except in Chicago, where murders are on the rise). Instead the rest of the entire country, especially many of those states that have most reduced their gun control laws, has experienced a dramatic decrease in all forms of violent crime, even the artificial category of gun crime (as if any victim really cared whether they were shot rather than stabbed or beaten to death). The vast majority of these states and cities are experiencing rates of such crimes lower than they have since the 1950s. Now, while there is all kinds of quibbling about whether the decrease in gun control has caused this decrease, one thing is blatantly obvious - it has not in any way prevented it. So while we'll probably never all agree that guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens saves innocent lives overall and reduces violent crime, we can definitively say that these guns play no role in causing violent crime, otherwise our violent crime rate would be climbing over the last 20 years, as it did in countries like England that increased their gun (and even knife) control laws.
Has USCCB issued anything on this since 2000? they seeem to have opinuiions on everythng else -- especially "dangers" of contraception and gay marriage.
NRA members and fellow travelers, please calm down.Nobody is calling for churches to preach against responsible and legal gun ownership. In local areas here, where gang violence, crime, and poverty is high, churches are focusing on the social and economic factors that beget these problems. They're trying to instill a spirit of community.There is no movement among pastors to grab guns from those who are lawfully packing heat for their own protection. I would, however, say that those with CCW permits have been remarkably unable to stop drive-by shootings or the deaths of those who are inadvertently in the line of fire. My old Auntie, who lived in Detroit off Vernor Avenue in the house where she was born, said her dog was more protection than her pistol. Someone tried to break in one night (she was in her mid 80s), and she drew her pistol out of her purse but was so scared she promptly dropped it in the dark. Barney, a well-trained slobbery mastiff, ran to the door growling and barking loud and scared the intruder away.
Nobody needs an AK 4y for self defense. They should be outlawed.Here's a bibliography from the Washington Post on various aspects of the gun problem. Probably more than you care to know. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/nation/guns/
Oops -- should be: AK 47
@ Ann Olivier: Would you care to expand on why you believe that a law abiding citizen should not have access to a semi-automatic centerfire rifle for purposes of self defense? Additionally, one of the core functions of the 2nd Amendment was to ensure that citizens had the means by which to defend and/or restore their nation. The term 'Arms' at that time included everything from knives to cannons. As matter of fact, our nation's first warships were privately owned merchant vessels armed with citizen-owned cannons. Lastly, your statement "... nobody needs an AK 4(7) for self defense..." is completely indefensible. We all know that a coptic Christian in Cairo Egypt NEEDS an AK 47 for self defense, as just 1 example.
The ONLY thing additional gun laws/restrictions does is stop the good person, the one who afraid of losing his job, his family, his freedom, from having the means to defend himself. Do you REALLY think gun laws will stop a criminal from finding ways to commit malice? Even if guns were to magically vanish as you wish, would you gleefully allow one or two ex-cons "on the streets of Oakland" access to your family using only some knives, a baseball bat, or even their bare fists? Guns are the great equalizer, and handguns are built for SELF-DEFENSE, a basic human right and the purpose of the 2nd Amendment. The actions of a few who abuse a right do not preclude the law-abiding from exercising theirs.
@Choprzrul Exactly. Another example closer to home were shop owners during the LA Riots who defended their storefronts (and in actuality their lives) with AK-47s after Chief Daryl Gates withdrew the LAPD from their areas. Saying, "You don't need so-and-so," for self-defense is intellectually dishonest and purports a clairvoyance that certain future events will not occur.
Ann, in lieu of allowing you or anyone else to decide what I "need" for self defense, I'll just go with what I want and deem appropriate.
leung --Try to check your hysteria. Nobody here has said all weapons must be outlawed. . You have exaggerated humongously. And if you can't tell the difference between the firepower of a shotgun and an AK 47, you are in deep trouble and are exactly the sort of person who will shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a weapon.
The Second Amendment (as amended) is a religious belief to many Americans. I say 'as amended' because they, and their political brethren conveniently ignore the first phrase, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State..." I've owned and use guns, and am a Vietnam veteran, but I see no rational reason that guns should be so readily available and be unregistered. I also see no rationale in today's society for gun owners who are not trained and licensed. Just today it was reported that some fellow shot and killed his son, accidentally, outside a gun dealer -- with an 'unloaded' handgun. This sort of thing happens way too often to ignore the need for some of that 'well regulation.'
Nicholas C. --I retain a hope that the people who know the literary arts the best can figure out how to measure unnecessary and therefore unacceptable violence in artworks.Would you like ot give it a try? How do *you know* that a movie or TV program is too violent for the common good?
When I was in the Peace Corps, the most common question I got in-country was, "Are you CIA?" We were told in training to expect that one, but the second most common question initially caught me by surprise, "Can we see your gun?" The perception among the local populace was that all adult Americans carry guns, or have almost instantaneous access to them, pretty much 24/7. I'd get looks of disbelief when I'd reply, "don't own one, have never handled one." Their mistaken belief stemmed from the flood of trashy, low-budget, violent B movies that Hollywood ships directly to the Third World for quick and easy profit. I don't pretend to know the answer to reducing the glut of guns in American society, though a strictly-enforced ban on assault weapons and more stringent background checks would be good first steps. I don't know if anyone else heard the NPR report earlier this week about Camden, New Jersey. Camden's been in a downward spiral for decades as a well-functioning city, and while the prevalence of illegal guns on the streets is but one of its many problems, the report was both sobering and very depressing.http://www.npr.org/2012/12/06/166658788/crime-ridden-camden-to-dump-city...
"there is not even one single legitimately conducted study in the literature that has ever found any reduction in violent crime from any gun control law or set of laws. "sounds awfully like the way authorities talked about nuke plants in Japan, just as taboo a topic as guns in the US, until last year...
"guns are used by citizens 200,000 times a year to defend themselves, more than 10 times as often as they are to kill illegally." 20,000 gun murders a year in the USA plus a number of killings in selfdefense (thousands more no doubt). Clearly not a civilized country.
I have always wondered if guns were not so readily available, if the people who use them to commit acts of violence would be brave enough to try to do their deeds with knives or other close contact weapons. I think that the willingness to commit the violence is more than directly related to the "apartness" that a gun brings from the perpetrator and the victim(s).You couldn't have movie house massacres if those committing it had to do it one on one.
"Choprzrul 12/08/2012 - 1:24 pm@ Ann Olivier: Would you care to expand on why you believe that a law abiding citizen should not have access to a semi-automatic centerfire rifle for purposes of self defense? "Heck, I think everyone should carry nothing but military grade weapons, including bazookas.It's the Amuriken way, don't you know?
My goodness: did the NRA recommend this posting to all of the gun nuts around?
Oakland has 2 particular problems: one is a police force with a history of mismanagement and problems that has almost gotten it put under the control of a federal judge. The jury is still out as to whether that will happen or not. The second one is that the good citizens thereof recently voted down a reasonably small parcel tax that would have allowed the OPD to get its staffing back up to recommended levels. So, they are continue to reap what they have sown. Rest assured: it was the good white folk in the hills who did not want the extra taxes because the main problems are in the areas where "those folks" reside, mostly in poverty and rampant drug sales (hint ... lots of sales to the white folks).
@jbruns: Quoting directly from McDonald v. Chicago US Supreme Court decision: "JUSTICE ALITO delivered the opinion of the Court...concluding that the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment right, recognized in Heller, to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense."In Heller, SCOTUS ruled that the 2nd Amendment IS NOT about the militia, it IS about fundamental individual civil rights. In McDonald, they ruled that the 2nd Amendment is incorporated against the individual states via the 14th Amendment. Thus-Gun Rights ARE Civil RightsTaking that with the fact that 100 million Americans are gun owners ( that's less than 1/3 of the population ), and you end up with a minority group wishing to exercise their civil rights. Then you have people like the author of this article and jbruns voicing their desire to further oppress the civil rights of a minority group. Sad.
@Joseph O., conflating the findings of two of our most respected scientific bodies, who are actually anti-gun (all but one member of the NAS review board had made their anti-gun feelings public before even being appointed), that there is no research that has ever been been able to demonstrate any positive effects on violent crime from any gun control law is very different than a pro-energy body covering up the flaws in a nuclear power plant. The lack of "discussion", is, as I pointed out, due to ignorant innuendo such as that you've made here. Rather than looking at our best empirical data on the subject and drawing rational conclusions for intelligent discussion, you choose instead to insinuate fraud with no evidence. There's nothing taboo remotely implied here. Just the opposite; the facts are being lined up and laid out for all to see. You just prefer to ignore them because they conflict with your political agenda. As for 200,000 self-defense shootings and 20,000 gun murders equating to a non-civilized society, first, it's not 20,000. I said that 200,000 was MORE than 10 times. Second, the majority of those are gang members shooting each other over drugs (according to the FBI), not criminals killing innocent victims, so the "uncivil" aspect is a small well-defined subgroup, not the society as a whole. Third, it sounds like you would prefer that those proportions were reversed, as they are in countries like England where private citizens are prohibited from carrying or using ANY weapon for self defense, and with a violent crime rate significantly higher than ours, even when ours was at its highest (strictest gun/knife laws in the world and highest violent crime rate in Europe). Yeah, that sounds so much more civilized.
@Ann Olivier - you are in deep trouble and are exactly the sort of person who shouldnt be posting on gun rights because you are so obviously clueless on the subject.@jbruns - "conveniently ignore the first phrase" Stop with the lies. It's settled law. Get over it. "Ive owned and use guns, and am a Vietnam veteran." You are also, at the very least, misinformed regarding the Bill of Rights.@william collier - Our civil rights aren't subject to the opinions held by third world peasants. Additionally, a strictly-enforced ban on assault weapons was enacted under President Pervert and it had zero effect on violent crime.@Jim McCrea - do you suffer from a lack of impulse control? 99.9% of law abiding gun owners don't. Did the Brady Bunch recommend this posting to all of the criminal enabling nuts around? Oakland's two great problems that you came up with are mismanagement of the part of LE and too low taxes? LOL
@John and @choprzul. Misinformed about the Bill of Rights? Hardly. Split decisions by the Supreme Court have been wrong in the past, and we are free to hold the opinion that they were wrong in this case. Furthermore, even the SCOTUS majority found that States had the right to regulate firearms. I don't think either of you can find in anything I said that I wished to ban all firearms for all citizens. I don't. But I do think they may be well regulated, even for the purpose of self defense. Many, if not all, Constitutional rights are subject to some limitations and regulations. The Second Amendment should be no exception. For example, I didn't see the Supreme Court deciding that citizens should be allowed into their sessions with weapons, did they? So, obviously, regulation is already accepted practice.
Commendations to jbruns, who recognizes that the 2nd Amendment begins with an ablative absolute construction that gives important direction to those seeking to understand what the amendment's drafters intended. As Choprzrul points out, the Supreme Court's Catholic majority chose not to follow that direction, instead recognizing a new right: self defense in the home by means of handgun(s). Meanwhile, as David Pasinski's unanswered question suggests, the bishops, not otherwise shy about raising religious concerns in discussions of US Constitutional Law, have said remarkably little about guns. Whatever the 2nd Amendment's ambiguities, what Jesus said about self defense is relatively clear. Consider the Sermon on the Mount, the Sermon on the Plain, etc.With respect to armed self-defense, Matt 26:50-52 could not be clearer. On this topic our culture, including our political elites and our bishops, are in need of further "evangelizing."
He details the immediate hostile response to sportscaster Bob Costas when he speculated that Kassandra Perkins and/or her murderer, Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Jovan Belcher, might be alive if guns were not so readily available.
I am all for gun control but tying it to the Belcher case was a poor excuse for it. Better case was the Colorado massacre in the theatre where access to guns and firearms was clearly a factor. But even there, untreated mental illness was another component.In that case, his action was not completely unpredictable. The psychiatrist had warned the university.Ditto for Belcher, there was concern from the NFL team and others regarding his behaviour. He has a concussion and had been drinking and using drugs.So accessibility of firearms is a contributing factor and gun laws will help. Use and abuse of drugs and alcohol was also, in this instance, a huge contributing factor. Limiting firearms would at the very least help reduce the lethality associated with people exploding. But the fact remains that drugs, alcohol and an entire dysfunctional ethos is part of the NFL and while these men are athletes, I would not say many are shining examples of healthy lifestyles.
Guns and the immediate deaths they cause are not the biggest problem. Automobiles cause more immediate deaths and, through the production of greenhouse gases, can continue to kill for centuries to come. I can give up my guns without a burp if this country were doing something to avoid climate apocalypse. Otherwise, it's a waste of political capital.
IMHO we can't talk about guns (to answer the original question). We will begin to be able to talk about guns when one of the people who took time away from gun sites -- advising newbies that if they bring down a squirrel with an AK-47 there won't be much left to cook -- to abuse the usual contributors at this site ..., not until one of those folks has this happen to him:He is sitting at a table in the bar when a gunman, armed to the teeth, starts shooting up the place. Our hero turns over his table and reaches for his own gun. Unfortunately, the table leg catches in the hem on his pants, and he can't get his weapon out of his pocket. The gunman sprays his part of the room and our hero notices the table is not stopping the bullets. He rolls to his right, freeing up his pistol, which goes off, shooting a hole in his pants. Suddenly he is deafened by a fusillade fired by another armed self-defender, which attracts the gunman's attention to his side of the room. He rolls further to his right to a spot behind the end of the bar, pulls himself up on one knee and draws a bead on the gunman. He fires just as a police officer, responding to the shots, steps in the way and wounds the officer. His fellow cops put down heavy fire on our self-defending citizen, hitting him in several places, while the gunman makes his escape.Several months later, after the police investigation ends and our citizen's wounds have healed enough for him to get out of traction, he starts to rally fellow NRA members to set up a sensible gun law caucus within the organization. If and when that happens, we will be able to talk about guns.Of course, he will be called clueless, a third world peasant, ignorant about the Constitution and suffering from lack of impulse control. But, hey, that can happen to anybody.
@JBurns, yes, split decisions have been wrong before. But both Heller and McDonald are completely consistent with every single federal court case dealing with, or even mentioning, guns and the 2nd Amendment, up to the middle of the 20th Century. Up until then every single court consistently viewed the 2nd Amendment as protecting an individual right that is an inherent civil right of all people, and one which was subject to only the most minor of regulations. It was only in the middle of the 20th Century that a handful (never all, and never the Supreme Court) of lower federal courts started trying to reinterpret the 2nd Amendment to mean anything else, as a reaction to a Supreme Court decision that they realized would, if interpreted literally, would ban virtually all regulation of most guns. In other words, the Supreme Court ruled that such regulation was unconstitutional, and a few lower courts freaked out and tried to invent from nothing some kind of convoluted alternative interpretation. None of these re-interpretations were consistent with each other. Many lower courts and the Supreme Court itself never adopted any of these alternative "collective right" or "militia right" interpretations, and Hugo Black, who was part of the majority in the last decision of the Supreme Court dealing with the 2nd Amendment directly before Heller said of the scope of the protection of the 2nd Amendment later, when discussing that decision, "its [the 2nd Amendment's] prohibition is absolute", meaning that the government is absolutely prohibited from banning the ownership or carrying of firearms in common use for lawful purposes. So, given that every writing on the subject of the 2nd Amendment right by the Founding Fathers who wrote it and passed it, and every judicial and legislative discussion of it for the subsequent 150 years of the Constitution's history, unanimously agree that it protects an individual right to own and carry firearms in public, with only the most minimal of regulations allowed, I'd say that if you disagree with any decision that holds the same, you actually do NOT understand the Bill of Rights, or at least Amendment 2 of it.
@Tom Blackburn, so, how would you define "sensible gun laws"? First, what gun law, short of banning a person from having a gun in their home for self defense (in which case your "hero" just dies at the hand of the criminal attacker), or prohibiting police from carrying them, would in any way have led to a different outcome in your ridiculous hypothetical scenario? As every country that has tried has seen, even making guns illegal doesn't stop criminals from getting and using them. Even in the two industrialized countries with the strictest gun control laws, such as England and Japan (both of which are small island nations with a far greater ability to keep them out and with far fewer civil-rights protections to hamper police in intercepting them), criminals who want guns. So your "hero" would have been shot by either the criminal or the police either way, and probably would have died had it been by the criminal. But even if we don't limit ourselves to your scenario, what is a "sensible" gun law? I would submit that any law which limits the constitutional and human rights of citizens, without giving any positive benefit to society, is not "sensible" in any way. And, as I pointed out in an earlier post, even the most respected scientific research bodies in the country have admitted that, out of hundreds of peer-reviewed studies, not one single legitimately conducted study of the question has found any reduction in violent crime from any gun control law, ever. So, in what sense is enacting a law that has no social benefit, but increases the risk to law-abiding citizens, in any way "sensible"? And there is a significant cost to these laws. First, just as the drug laws, they make criminals out of people for doing nothing but reasonably possessing and using some thing. This ruins people's lives unnecessarily and places a criminal justice burden on society. Second, enforcement is economically costly. Canada and several US states, for example, have recently done away with their gun registries (one of the laws most anti-gun people think is most "sensible"). Why? Because despite the millions of dollars a year that administering such registration systems cost, not one single criminal prosecution has ever been achieved through the use of a gun registry. None. Canada, for example, was promised by the politicians who pushed for it that their registry would significantly increase such convictions and cost only $2 million a year to run. From the very beginning the cost turned out to actually be almost $70 million a year, and no useful information leading to a prosecution ever came from it out of the 21 years they had it. And yet, somehow we're told that such a system (which HAS been used effectively to confiscate and destroy legally owned guns in England and Australia - despite the exact same claim as made here, that it would never be used this way), is "sensible". There is one example of a sensible law that has been shown (by the CDC, one of the groups that found no support for gun control laws in reducing violent crime) to have a positive effect. These are laws aimed at reducing the chance that children will access firearms in the home and cause harm to themselves of others. What they found is that the two types of laws meant to do this both work. One are the so-called "safe storage" laws that require guns be stored in an unloaded and locked state. The other simply harshly punishes any adult if they should have known their gun was easily accessible to children and a child in fact gets it and causes harm. Anti-gun people want us to believe that the first type of law is superior, because they believe that since it imposes a prior restriction on gun owners it prevents a child from getting a gun, while the second law only punishes the gun owner after the fact. However, what the CDC found was that both laws work equally well in reducing the incidence of children accessing guns. On the other hand, the two laws have very different effects on the ability to use a gun in self-defense. The first prevents it entirely, while the second allows the owner to tailor their method of keeping a gun in the house to be both safe and ready to use. Fortunately the Supreme Court, in Heller, has ruled that the first type of law is also unconstitutional.The problem is that the anti-gun definition of "sensible gun law" is either based on complete ignorance of what is sensible when it comes to gun laws, or is just double-speak for laws that push their anti-gun agenda. And as for your little scenario, if such a victim (virtually none of whom exist, because this is a fantasy scenario oft dreamt up by anti-gunners, but one which virtually never occurs in real-life) ever did try to argue for what you call "sensible gun laws", he'd be out-voted by the 200,000-2,000,000 (depending on which official US government estimate you choose) people in the US who effectively use a gun each year to protect themselves from criminal attacks without suffering such a convoluted series of consequences.
If the penalties for selling guns illegally were very stiff and the judges imposed them, (assuming, of course, there was money to support the police who track down the sellers) I bet there would be many, many fewer guns on the street. Say 10-20 years sentences, no possibility of pardon.There's a saying that a conservative is a liberal who was mugged. Well, I was mugged, and the consequences for my health were severe. The mugger threw me down so violently on the concrete in my driveway that it impaired my kidney function. At first my doctors were afraid I was dying. (But turns out I'm not dying-- injured kidneys can repair, and mine have repaired some.) I was and still am pretty damn mad at those guys. (There were three of them.) Did I go out and buy a gun? No. Evidence is evidence. A gun might be use by me to protect myself successfully but it is more likely that it would be misused somehow. (You want to play Russian roulette, go ahead, take chances, but it's a particularly stupid game.)On the other hand, surely there should be strict laws, enforced ones, about who may not have guns, and those who have them must first learn how to use them.
A sensible gun law is any law that fosters and creates a WELL ORDERED MILITIA. What we have now is far from well ordered ... or ordered at all!John Paschke: after reading your comments, I suggest that YOU are the one suffering from a lack of impusle control. You belligerence is duly noted and quite in line with what I assume is an NRA membership.
Oh, yes, John: do enlighten us as to what Oakland's problems are if they isn't heavily influenced by the 2 situations I outlined above. You live there, right?
"The problem is that the anti-gun definition of sensible gun law is either based on complete ignorance of what is sensible when it comes to gun laws, or is just double-speak for laws that push their anti-gun agenda."@rod -- That's why I say that it will take someone who drank the Kool Aid and had second thoughts to start minds collectively working in the right direction. I wouldn't expect an anti-gun nut to write a sensible law, and I wouldn't expect a gun nut to understand the concept if he saw it. Somewhere among your 200,000 to 2,000,000 Americans there must be some people who can talk and think at the same time. The lead should be taken by someone who knows something about guns. That's all I said.This is all I'll add: If you want to think like a European intellectual who will walk into a brick wall if his philosophy tells him the wall is not there, go ahead. But you will be no help.
Tom B. =Who are those European intellectuals who would walk into a brick wall? I've never even heard of one.
Ann, Oh, mostly Jacques Derrida. I coined the brick wall metaphor -- yes, it's a metaphor -- after wrestling with Derrida and coming to the decision that my ignorance is invincible or his prose is impenetrable, or maybe both. It was his proclivity for putting opposites together and making them one thing that gave me the idea of the vaporous adobe and the adobe vapor, and that led to the brick wall. Derrida has acolytes, boy does he have them!So I made it plural, and now I apply it to anybody who sticks to one single principle and uses it to trump common sense. (We used to call them cranks.)
Gun laws, like immigration laws, can't work if they are not enforced. And the gun lobby buys powerful influence in Congress and State legislatures to ensure that laws are a)weak; and b) are not aggressively enforced. It is intuitively obvious to anyone who cares to think openly about it that our society would be safer and our liberty just as secure if we had fewer guns on urban streets and fewer guns readily available to unstable individuals who use them to carry out their violent plans and fantasies.Sensible gun laws would keep guns out of the hands of people who do not or cannot assume law abiding responsibility for them. Firearm and owner registration would be a sensible gun law, so would laws limiting the size of magazines and the functionality of certain guns, for example fully automatic weapons. Hand guns, readily concealable, present special threats to our security, in the hands of criminals, certainly, but also in the hands of non-criminals who lack the ability to use and carry them responsibly. Why are so many handguns used accidentally to kill and wound family members?There is nothing so special about guns. Yes, they are specifically mentioned in the Constitution, but so are other rights that we have developed sensible rules around. Frankly, a lot of gun owners are dupes of the NRA, which uses them for political clout, but whose real interest is in protecting gun dealers and manufacturers who want to use the Constitution as a shield in order to maximize their profits -- public interest be damned.
Jbruns -I agree, except that guns seem to be extremely important to men who doubt their own masculinity. I think that Freud got this right. So maybe if we somehow lessened the culture's obsession with sex, the self-doubters wouldn't feel so impelled to buy firepower.
My previous posting read; "guns are used by citizens 200,000 times a year to defend themselves, more than 10 times as often as they are to kill illegally. 20,000 gun murders a year in the USA plus a number of killings in selfdefense (thousands more no doubt). Clearly not a civilized country."I got this reply: "As for 200,000 self-defense shootings and 20,000 gun murders equating to a non-civilized society, first, its not 20,000. I said that 200,000 was MORE than 10 times".I guess maths is not my forte. I suppose 19,000 would be a fair estimate then?
"any law which limits the constitutional and human rights of citizens, without giving any positive benefit to society, is not sensible in any way.... Out of hundreds of peer-reviewed studies, not one single legitimately conducted study of the question has found any reduction in violent crime from any gun control law, ever. "Remember Michael Moore in Canada? Or Japan? Of course "gun control laws" are only band-aid for a country as riddled with gun murders as the USA. Far more radical conversion is required if the US is ever to become a peaceful country like Japan today.
Has anyone else here ever seen such an extraordinary response to such a posting? It's now leaked beyond the civilized confines of Commonweal, bringing some messages into my ordinary e-mail having to do with The Captain's Journal, a blog of sorts of which I'd been blissfully ignorant until now.Does this mean that the NRA is out trawling sites as recherch as dot.Commonweal to smoke out gun control heretics, and make the world safe for AK-47s? On the other hand, perhaps some of those joining this conversation will subscribe to, and (what's more) read Commonweal, and that's all to the good. Perhaps this would help bring about the "radical conversion" that Joseph O'Leary rightly calls for.
@Tom Blackburn: Why do you feel the need to make up a scenario? There are many, many case studies of shooting incidents that actually happened.
... [Trackback]...[...] Read More here: commonwealmagazine.org/blog/?p=22224 [...]...
What is so terribly sad is that Americans have become an extremely fearful people. Gone is the optimism of my childhood and adolescence. Oh, ;the wisdom of Roosevelt shdn hd said "We have nothing to fear but fear itself"!I really hate to think of Americanas as being so chicken they have to literally live with guns. What caused the people to change like this?
And just today, another school shooting in which something like 27 died, 18 of them kids. At least one shooter dead. We are a gun-soaked culture. Indeed, not every effort at weapons control makes sense--what is needed (as I mentioned in the original post,) in part is a cultural shift in which we no longer look to guns to solve our problems or (as seems to be the case for the disturbed but well-armed who go on shooting sprees,) to express ourselves. But in the meantime, anything we can do to limit access to the more lethal weapons (regulating sales in a realistic way, e.g., instead of the "wink and nod" that allow so many shadow sales now,) might make incidents like this less deadly. And to those who demand data AND insist that more guns would make us safer, you can't have it both ways. Privately owned guns have been shown to make us less safe, not more safe. So--more guns or more safety? There's a link to some numbers in the original post. And I find labeling the CDC "anti-gun" an absurdity. In fact-based reality, folks like those at the CDC do the math and generate their recommendations therefrom. We can all have our own opinions, but we can't all have our own facts. Why isn't gun control and the cultural shifts I have described a life issue?
It's now been 7 days since Lisa Fullam posted her original piece on guns, calling forth the wrath of the NRA's people. How many of those days have been without a public shooting, either attempted or actually carried out? None, I think, but there may have been one. The original report of today's shooting in Connecticut talked of three people taken to the hospital; but now the Washington Post reports the appalling figures cited above. It also says that the President has expressed his "enormous sympathy" for those with losses. Frankly, I think he should drop everything and make a trip to Connecticut, not just to express sympathy but to talk some home truths about such massacres, actual and attempted.
After what happened in Connecticut today, Josh Marshall, editor of TPM, wrote this:Dont mistake me: Im not making the argument that gun control wouldnt be effective or the standard arguments that the guns were bought legally or by people with no history mental illness, whatever. Id be ready to support pretty much all the things that normally go under the heading of gun control. But Im hearing a lot of people saying we need to talk about guns, [need to] restart that conversation. And I agree, at least in the abstract. But what exactly are we talking about? And how we propose to get from here to there? How do we make our country less of a moral embarrassment?I dont want to hear about these tragedies being rooted in evil or the human heart. We know the human heart is a substandard product. The brain frequently malfunctions. Its offensive to put this forward as part of a discussion about policy as opposed to theodicy and meditation. We know that the vast, vast proportion of gun owners use them legally and safely. We also know that gun deaths are rare in many other countries quite similar to the USA for the simple reason they dont have so many friggin guns all over the place. This is obvious. And guns just make it easy to kill a lot of people really quickly. Freely available body armor helps too. Im not trying to stop the discussion. I want to start it. But Im looking for some guidance on how it can be about more than words. There's more at http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/12/how_do_we_fix_this.php?ref...
Thanks for that post from Lexington, in the Economist. The most telling figure: 39 homicides by guns in the UK, 12,000 in the US, which has six times the population. 6x39=234, which should be our quota, by UK standards. Why is our figure 51.28 times higher than that quota? The lack of gun control may explain much of it, but it can't explain all of it. What else is going on, and why are we afraid to look for it?The news reports that Pres. Obama is traveling to Newtown, CT tomorrow (Sunday). Good for him. Maybe he can shock some people into waking up, and maybe he can shock our elected representatives into courage.


text:
White River Fly Shop Wading Boots for Men
White River Fly Shop® wading boots are an all-purpose wader. The waders feature felt soles, a polyurethane-coated midsole, a leather mesh upper, and improved styling for a comfortable fit. Color: Khaki Gray. Imported.
- All-purpose wader
- Felt soles
- Polyuethane-coated midsole
- Leather mesh upper
Need Help? 7 days a week: 7am to 10pm CT or call 1.800.227.7776 anytime

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Nail polish policy is rescinded
August 17, 2013
BELMONT COUNTY – CVS Pharmacy had briefly considered an in-house policy of restricting the sale of nail polish remover and other items containing acetone, an ingredient in methamphetamines....
And these local Barney Fifes need to concern themselves with doing what WE pay them to do!!
While these wannabee CSI stars are out wasting taxpayer dollars shutting down the nail polish cartel, houses are being broken into and people are being robbed!!!!
0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Seriously, when is this liberal stupidity gonna stop!!!!
You simply can't outlaw and restrict every product on the market that some dope head might use to get high!!!!!!!
I have the RIGHT to purchase common household chemicals, spray paint, antihistamines, cough syrup, and aerosol whip cream WITHOUT a background check!!!!!!
And i will BOYCOTT any and ALL businesses that attempt to RESTRICT the sale of ANY of them!!!!
0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Showing 2 of 2 comments
Post a Comment
You must first login before you can comment.


text:
Jack Harper is one of the last few drone repairmen stationed on Earth. Part of a massive operation to extract vital resources after decades of war with a terrifying threat known as the Scavs, Jack's mission is nearly complete.Living in and patrolling the breathtaking skies from thousands of feet above, his soaring existence is brought crashing down when he rescues a beautiful stranger from a downed spacecraft. Her arrival triggers a chain of events that forces him to question everything he knows and puts the fate of humanity in his hands.
Rated: PG-13
Starring: Tom Cruise, Morgan Freeman
Directed by: Joseph Kosinski
Run Time: 2 hr. 9 mins.
Released by: Universal Pictures
Official Site
Corporate Office
About Cinemagic


text:
You are visiting our UK site. Click here to view our US site
Five Element Constitutional Acupuncture (9780702044618)
Publisher: Churchill Livingstone
Binding: Hardcover
This package provides you with the book plus the eBook - giving you the printed book, plus access to the complete book content electronically. Evolve eBooks allows you to quickly search the entire book, make notes, add highlights, and study more efficiently. Buying other Evolve eBooks titles makes your learning experience even better: all of the eBooks will work together on your electronic "bookshelf", so that you can search across your entire library of Complementary Therapye Books.
This exciting new edition of Five Element Constitutional Acupuncture gives a clear, detailed, and accessible presentation of the main features of constitutional Five Element acupuncture. It covers the context and history of this form of acupuncture, as well as the relevant Chinese medicine theory. After examining the Elements themselves and the functions of the Organs, the book explores the basis of diagnosis in Five Element acupuncture, possible blocks to treatment and the treatment itself. It puts this style of treatment into the context of other styles of acupuncture treatment - especially Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) as it is used in the West today.
- The Five Elements referred to in the title are Wood, Fire, Earth, Metal, and Water.
- Gives a clear, detailed and accessible presentation of the main features of Five Element Constitutional Acupuncture treatment.
- Covers the context and history of this form of acupuncture, as well as the relevant Chinese medicine theory.
- Includes an unambiguous description of the principle aspects of diagnosis within a system, ironing out inconsistencies often present in discussions of these aspects.
This edition has been thoroughly revised throughout and includes a new and improved colour page design.
Save: £4.50
Saved: 10.00%!
Customer Reviews
There are currently no reviews for this book. Be the first!Review this book...
People who purchased this also purchased...
The Foundations of Chinese Medicine, 2nd editionby Giovanni Maciocia
Price: £81.89 £90.99
[more info]
Chinese Dietary Therapyby Liu Jilin and Gordon Peck
Price: £46.79 £51.99
[more info]
Endometriosis, Infertility & Traditional Chinese Medicine: A Laywoman�s Guideby Bob Flaws
Price: £9.99 £19.96
[more info]
Acupuncture in the Treatment of Depressionby Rosa Schnyer
Price: £41.39 £45.99
[more info]
Blood Stasisby Gunter Neeb
Price: £43.19 £47.99
[more info]
Rang & Dale's Pharmacology, 6th editionby Humphrey Rang, Maureen Dale, James Ritter and R...
Price: £41.39 £45.99
[more info]
Ten Lectures on the Use of Medicinals from the Personal Experience of Jiao Shu Deby Jiao Shu De and Craig Mitchell (Translator)
Price: £39.69 £55.00
[more info]
Student to Master Tuina DVDby Errol Lynch
Price: £27.00 £30.00
[more info]
The Concise Book of Musclesby Chris Jarmey
Price: £15.29 £16.99
[more info]
Subscribe To CMT
Shopping Basket
Your basket is empty!
Change Language
Change Currency
Events Calendar
Qigong for Self-Healing with Daverick Leggett (Saturday 15th October)
The focus of the day will be self healing through the practice of Qigong. [more]
Working with Excess- TCM Nutrition with Daverick Leggett (Friday 14th October)
Many,or perhaps all, chronic conditions have an underlying deficiency at their root [more]


text:
The Skyline Lady Thunderbirds played solidly in sweeping the Central Christian triangular with Burrton on Tuesday. The T-Birds downed the host CC Cougars 25-11; 25-20 and then short-circuited the Burrton Chargers 25-8; 25-18.
Alyssa Swonger collected 7 kills and 2 blocks against Central Christian. Janessa Davis had 5 kills. Shelby Bender served 3 aces.
In the Burrton match, Davis led with 6 kills, Taylor Tobin added 5 and Swonger 3. The Lady T-Birds serving was also deadly. Taylor DeWeese scored 3 aces while Kaitlyn Stark, Kamryn Stark, Bender and Mycha Owens each had 2.
Despite the convincing wins, SHS head coach Summer Younie felt that her girls played a little bit sluggishly. In contrast to the comfortable Thunder Dome, Central's gym is not air-conditioned and the Lady T-Birds may have been feeling the effects of the heat.
Younie had words of praise for right-siders Alyssa Swonger and Taylor Tobin. "They played really well, both blocking and hitting," Younie commented.
"We also got some great passes from Betsy Giles who went in and played some back row," Younie continued. "Jessica DeWeese saw some action in the front row. She is going to be a force."
The event also saw the first action this season by the Skyline JV. "There were some moments of greatness from many of our JV players," Coach Younie said. Burrton got up early on SHS JV as nerves came into play for many of the T-Birds. They were more relaxed against Central, but Coach Younie said there were still some girls struggling with the rotation, but that they would get it.
Skyline next has a triangular at Medicine Lodge September 17 where they will see Norwich.
Location, ST | website.com


text: Perhaps this question is too elementary, but if it's written down anywhere, I'd love to know about it. Suppose I have a power series $f\in R[[x,y]]$ for some commutative, unital ring. I've recently been trying to write down an explicit formula for the power series in three variables, $f(f(x,y),z)-f(x,f(y,z))$, written down in terms of the coefficients of $f$, but am wondering if this classical-seeming computation has already been done somewhere else. I'm perfectly happy assuming $f(x,y)=f(y,x)$. Additionally, I'm really only interested in power series such that $f(x,0)=x$ and $f(0,y)=y$. Note that the so-called associator is also a the Gerstenhaber circle product of $f$ with itself, if that helps at all.


text:
How many days do you think this woot-off will go?
3? 4? 5?
9 Answers answer
perhaps all the way to Saturday when they end with the debut of the Woot cast-iron skillet
@w00tgurl: Now that would be a wOOtOFF! And I'd defintely be in for 3 of those pans!
they will end the woot off right before someone gives me money.
The Murphey's law of the woot-off.
Since today is Tuesday, in homage to the past "Two for Tuesdays" I would say 2 days. Unless they do 3 days, because there were a few "Three for......
Only 2 days then a break before pan day.
until thursday afternoon is my quess


text:
Los Angeles Angels vs Seattle MarinersTue, May 21, 2013 - 7:05 PMAngel Stadium in Anaheim, CA
We are sorry, the date for this event has already passed. This event took place on 5/21/2013. Click here to view upcoming events for Los Angeles Angels.
Still unsure? Check out our user reviews for:
Have a question? Need help? Call us at 800.477.5285


text:
Please enter a maximum of 5 recipients. Use ; to separate more than one email address.
The expansion plans include the installation of additional facilities to increase the terminal's capacity from its current 6 million tpy throughput to a new annual capacity of 9 million tpy, as well as the construction of a fourth tank. The design will also explore possible future expansions.
Singapore LNG Corp. (SLNG) awarded a front-end
engineering and design (FEED) contract to WorleyParsons to
define the scope of the expansion of its LNG terminal send-out
and storage capacities, officials confirmed on Thursday.
The expansion plans include the installation of additional
facilities to increase terminal capacity from its current 6
million tpy throughput to a new rate of
9 million tpy, as well as the construction of a fourth
The FEED project is vital as it provides the
required engineering design and comprehensive scope of works
that will enable SLNG to invite tenders for the engineering,
procurement, and construction (EPC) contract for the
construction of the new facilities, as well as develop the
capital cost estimates for the expansion," said Neil McGregor,
CEO of Singapore LNG.
The project officially kicked off on
October 29, 2012, and is expected to be completed by early in
the 2013 second quarter.
The final investment decision for the construction of the fourth LNG
storage tank and its associated facilities will be made after
"WorleyParsons was selected following a rigorous tender
process, because it offered the best overall value from among
the bidding companies," McGregor said.
The design to be delivered by WorleyParsons will also explore
possible future expansions, including the
feasibility of a fifth and subsequent tanks.
"WorleyParsons appreciates the opportunity provided by SLNG to
provide high-quality FEED services for the expansion of
Singapores LNG terminal," said WorleyParsons
CEO Andrew Wood.
"In recent times, our team in Singapore, in collaboration with
global experts, has achieved a market leader status in the
design of onshore and floating LNG regasification facilities,"
he continued.
"We are looking forward to bringing this experience to the fore
and working closely with the SLNG team to provide a design
solution which caters to the future expansion, thereby allowing SLNG to
achieve its vision and business goals."
The additional tank and its associated facilities are
expected further enhance Singapores energy security
by allowing further diversification of fuel sources. The
additional capacity will also allow Singapore to respond to new
opportunities in global LNG markets, according to project officials.
All comments are subject to editorial review.
All fields are compulsory.
mukhtar singh
worley parsonspvt ltd india and any wear off words is good company , we r also employee is worley parson india claint GSPL GUJRAT,
Sign-up for the Free Daily HP Enewsletter!
A searchable database of project activity in the global hydrocarbon processing industry
Engineers and designers are highly skilled individuals. Forcing them to enter design changes using tables, forms and spreadsheets is unproductive and uneconomical, and it increases the likelihood of human error—this is the way that most instrumentation software systems currently work. For too long, software vendors have denied engineers and designers the simple practicality of a graphical visual engineering interface with "drag and drop" capability and inbuilt intelligence, ensuring changes are automatically replicated into all the associated data and databases.
Is 2016 the peak for US gasoline demand?
Too soon to tell
July 2016


text:
Is it possible to configure Yahoo Messenger on iChat? There are options in iChat to configure Google talk, yahoo messenger, AOL etc. So far I know it is possible to configure Google talk. But I did not get any document or evidence to configure Yahoo Messenger. I do not know why? Is it possible to fix this problem??? I am talking about Mac OS X Lion.
You will need to sign up for a Yahoo! account by going here.
Once you have done that, you can configure Yahoo Messenger in iChat by doing the following:
This method works for text chat. iChat claims to support video and SMS via Yahoo, but used the method above to configure Yahoo, and I got no option for video chat. Any more ideas?


text:
A large, usually black sign that has some interesting information on it.
"We need to talk."
by Z88.3 November 30, 2004
Trending Now
Top Definition
A dead rapper.He was a member of the Black Wall Street", from Compton California
RIP Billboard, an up and coming rapper who never got the chance to make it big
by The Game January 12, 2005
(v.) To draw or write on the skin of a person who has passed out from drinking. Often, the artwork is rendered in permanent marker (Sharpies predominate), with cartoon penises and profane words being popular themes.
After Mike passed out on the couch, a bunch of people at the party billboarded him.
by Inox July 05, 2007
A corporation that keeps track of Album Sales. It likes to tell you what to listen to, like MTV.
Did anybody watch the Billboard awards last night? Shitney Queers got 2 awards! That's why I went out and bought her album ASAP!
by Justin Timberlake July 06, 2003
In Dallas Texas, a place to advertise strip joints and Hooters. If you have been to this city, you know what I mean.
The majority of billboards in Dalls TX feature half-nakewd women. I guess texans are more fond of chixplotation than other states. Picture coming soon.
by yobastank October 26, 2004
brilliant, excellent, top. apart from amy winehouse i've never heard anyone say it... blatantly london scene kids will lap it up though.
simon amstell: "re you not having a nice time?"
amy winehouse: "yes i am having a BILLBOARD time!"
amy winehouse: "yes i am having a BILLBOARD time!"
by Boris1986 June 14, 2007
Something where companies post colorful, bright, annoying advertisements to distract you while you're driving or watching a game.
Oh great, I missed the second inning because of that stupid flashing Coke billboard!
Sorry, Officer, I wasn't watching the light, I was checking out the sexy Victoria's Secret billboard.
Sorry, Officer, I wasn't watching the light, I was checking out the sexy Victoria's Secret billboard.
by Loki July 02, 2003
billboard- a big sign that usually advertises a place or product(usually seen next to a road)
I felt it rather strange to see a billboard that advertised an adult bookstore while on the way home.
by Scott M. July 10, 2003


text:
Follow us
Grizzly and black bears do not socialize with each other, creating some explosive moments. Charlie must remain cautious in order to avoid being caught in the middle of a crossfire. Watch this video from Animal Planet's "Stranger Among Bears."
UP NEXTStranger Among Bears: Pushing Luck
UP NEXTStranger Among Bears: Happiness
UP NEXTKiller Clips: Grizzly Bear
UP NEXTWeird True and Freaky: Grizzly Bear Attacks Moose
UP NEXTNatural World: Black Bears and Grizzlies
UP NEXTBear Feeding Frenzy: A Grizzly Attack
UP NEXTMagnificent Moments: Grizzly Capture Gone Wrong
UP NEXTManeaters: Grizzly Bears
UP NEXTCaught in the Moment: Cinereous Vulture
UP NEXTUntamed and Uncut: Electrocuted Bear
UP NEXTThe Jeff Corwin Experience: Bear Fishing
UP NEXTWeird True and Freaky: Wreaking Havock On A Hammock
UP NEXTK9 Karma: Recognize Your Strengths
I Was Bitten: Botfly Maggot Extraction
Armed with a vaseline and a pair of tweezers, Evan Jolley extracts two parasitic maggots from his leg in this clip from Discovery Channel's "I Was Bitten."
I Was Bitten: Alligator Attack: Saving Kasey's Arm
After the recovery of Kasey Edward's arm from the belly of an aggressive alligator, doctors work to reattach it on this clip from Disocvery Channel's "I Was Bitten."
Animal Face-Off: Crocodile vs. Great White Shark
The saltwater crocodile is the largest reptile on the planet. The great white shark is the world's largest predatory shark. Saltwater crocodiles usually live in northern Australian rivers and offshore is where a saltwater croc could meet a great white.
When Dinosaurs Roamed America: Angry Triceratops
On the Discovery Channel's series, "When Dinosaurs Roamed America," we learn about the Triceratops. This massive, horned herbivorous dinosaur roamed the earth during the late Cretaceous period.
When Dinosaurs Roamed America: T-Rex Hunting
Young Tyrannosaurus rex hunted in packs, leaping with great speed and strength. Learn more in this clip from Discovery Channel's "When Dinosaurs Roamed America."
Animal Face-Off: Lion vs. Croc
More than 500 pounds of brawn and bad attitude, the lion was born to hunt and fight. An ambush predator with a fierce bite, the Nile crocodile is 18 feet long and 2,500 pounds of muscle and menace. Combatants face-off at the watering hole.
Animal Planet: Elusive Leopards
On Animal Planet's "Fooled by Nature," leopards go to great lengths to protect their kills from other predators and scavengers. Their ability to carry three times their weight while climbing trees allows them to hold on to their meal.
When Dinosaurs Roamed America: T-Rex the Predator
The Tyrannosaurus rex was the most feared predator of all the dinosaurs. Learn more about this menacing dinosaur of the Late Cretaceous period on the Discovery Channel's "When Dinosaurs Roamed America."
Animal Face-Off: Anaconda vs. Jaguar
Growing to more than 30 feet long and weighing 300 pounds, the anaconda is the largest snake on the planet. Pound for pound, the jaguar is more muscular than a tiger or a lion. Find out which of these creatures rules the jungle in "Animal Face-Off."
Cats 101: Sphynx
As a hairless breed, the Sphinx can seem more alien than pet. Find out how this breed lost its fur in this clip from Animal Planet's "Cats 101" series.
Dirty Jobs: Geoduck
What exactly is a Geoduck? Check out this clip from Discovery Channel's "Dirty Jobs" to learn more about this strange -- and honestly non-duckish -- animal.
When Dinosaurs Roamed America: Stegosaurus
On the Discovery Channel series, "When Dinosaurs Roamed America," we learn about the Stegosaurus. This dinosaur's plated back and spiked tail was designed to repel aggressive predators.
Watch ferociously innocent shows on Animalist!
Introducing Animalist, a Discovery Digital Network, where you can let your inner animal run wild!
River Monsters: How to Catch a Goliath Grouper
Jeremy Wade was hoping to catch a bull shark in the inlets of Florida, but instead hooked a goliath grouper. Find out what gear he used and what it takes to reel in a 750-pound monster.
River Monsters: Jeremy Grabs Killer Catfish
Jeremy is in the United States to track down fish of legend. He is after a killer catfish and when he goes noodling with some locals he gets a little more than he originally planned.
River Monsters: Crazy Leaping Fish
In this deleted scene, Jeremy is on the lookout for bull sharks in a popular inlet. He doesn't find one, but what he does find is a rare fish that leaps several feet out of the water with no warning whatsoever.
Beast Tracker: Swimming with Tiger Sharks
Dr. Andrew West enters a controlled shark environment to see how they will react to his presence.
Pit Bulls and Parolees: Tia Lends a Hand
Tia comes to the aid of a woman whose dog rescue suffered an enormous loss in a recent tornado.
Animal Hoarding: Bulldog-Poodle Mix Breeds Trouble
After her two bulldogs have puppies, Deanna goes from having 3 dogs to having 28.
Animal Hoarding: Dogs Take Over Abandoned House
Judy has been trying to renovate her house for 6 years but all of her money goes to taking care of her 59 dogs. She sleeps in the kennel with her pets.
Animal Hoarding: Dogs Ruining Ex-Rocker
Greg was a musician for over 30 years but now caring for his 21 dogs takes up all of his time.
Dog.Friend.Hero: Dog Surfs With Disabled Boy
When Ricochet was just a puppy her owner thought of giving her up for adoption when her training methods failed on her. Little did she know that this aloof dog's love of surfing would inspire millions of people and raise hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Dog.Friend.Hero: Dog Heals Soldier's Invisible Wounds
After he was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Staff Sgt. Spencer Milo was taken off of active duty from the war in Afghanistan and sent home. As part of his therapy he became involved with the Warrior Canine Connection.
Fatal Attractions: Tiger Shot After Mauling
A farmhand at a tiger reserve relives the day he was mauled and shows his scars.


text:
Let $(a, b)_v$ denote the Hilbert symbol on the completion $K_v$ of a global field $K$ at a place $v$. The Hilbert reciprocity law $\prod_v (a, b)_v = 1$ is a strict generalization of quadratic reciprocity, to which it reduces in the case $K = \mathbb{Q}, a = p, b = q$. Hilbert had this to say about his law:
The reciprocity law... reminds [sic] the Cauchy integral theorem, according to which the integral of a function over a path enclosing all of its singularities always yields the value $0$. One of the known proofs of the ordinary quadratic reciprocity law suggests an intrinsic connection between this number-theoretic law and Cauchy's fundamental function-theoretic theorem.
(I am working off of a translation here.) Does anyone have any idea what proof Hilbert could be referring to?


text:
Final Legs Of ASCS-Northwest Region Triple Track Challenge To Be At CGS
By Ben Deatherage
(Photo Courtesy of Malcolm White Photography)
Cottage Grove, Oregon- Cottage Grove Speedway is excited to host the final two legs of the Triple Track Challenge on Saturday May 24th and Sunday the 25th. It will feature the American Sprint Car Series-Northwest Region and will no doubt produce some breathtaking action on the historic ¼-mile clay oval.
The two races will be the first of six total visits by the ASCS-Northwest Region to Cottage Grove. They will return to CGS for a doubleheader on Friday June 13th and Saturday the 14th while they will once again wrap things up for Speedweek Northwest on Friday July 4th and Saturday the 5th.
The ASCS-Northwest Region 360 Sprints will be wrapping up the their final two legs of their 2014 Season Opener weekend being dubbed the Triple Track Challenge which features four races in four days at three different tracks. The weekend begins at Southern Oregon Speedway on Thursday May 22nd and then the series goes to Willamette Speedway in Lebanon on Friday the 23rd.
ASCS-National Tour regular Seth Bergman is expected to be in the house along with Logan Forler, Trey Starks, Henry Van Dam, Kyle Hirst, and many more. There has been one 360 Sprint feature contested at CGS in 2014 with Roger Crockett picking up the win on April 12th.
There have been twenty-two ASCS sanctioned events at CGS since 2008 with seven different winners. Roger Crockett leads that win list with a total of twelve visits to victory lane including all six visits in 2013. Jason Johnson has four wins at Cottage Grove while Shane Stewart has been in the winner's circle twice. Drivers who have won once when the tour has been in town include Jesse Hockett, Wayne Johnson, Brady Bacon, and Henry Van Dam.
For each night the Pit Gates will open at 2:00 PM, Front Gates open at 4:00, and Racing starts at 6:45. Ticket prices per event are Adults $15.00, Seniors/Military/Juniors (13-17) $13.00, Youths (Ages 12-6) $8.00, and Children under the age of 5 are FREE.
Be sure and don't miss a lap of the action as the ASCS-Northwest Region as the area's best 360 Sprint Car drivers will contest on seven different race tracks in three different states that include Oregon, Washington, and California. For the latest news and information regarding the ASCS-Northwest Region be sure and log on to www.ascsnorthwest.com.
Past ASCS-Northwest Region Winners At Cottage Grove Speedway:
2013- Roger Crockett on June 1st, Roger Crockett on July 5th, Roger Crockett on July 6th, Roger Crockett on July 19th*, Roger Crockett on July 20th*, Roger Crockett on August 23rd
2012- Shane Stewart on July 18th
2011- Roger Crockett on May 13th, Roger Crockett on May 14th, Wayne Johnson on July 13th, Jason Johnson on July 22nd*, Jason Johnson on July 23rd*, Henry Van Dam on September 17th
2010- Roger Crockett on July 3rd, Roger Crockett on July 4th, Jason Johnson on July 23rd*, Brady Bacon July 24th*
2009- Jesse Hockett on July 14th, Shane Stewart on July 24th*, Jason Johnson on July 25th*, Roger Crockett on August 11th
2008- Roger Crockett on July 15th
*- Denotes ASCS-National Tour vs. Northwest Region events
Driven by MyRacePassTM
Cottage Grove Speedway | All rights reserved


text:
(NewsUSA) - JoAnn Jones (name changed to protect patient privacy) first noticed the pain in her upper right shoulder and back. She initially went to her chiropractor, thinking it was related to lower back pain, but as the pain grew over the next five days, she knew it was something more serious. When she awoke the fifth morning with a rash covering parts of her body, her doctor immediately put her on an antiviral medication for shingles. The rash eventually faded, but the pain did not.
"It's a devastating illness, a chronic condition that you live with 24-7," explains Jones about her postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), or after-shingles pain.
Ms. Jones is not alone in her struggle. Every year, approximately 1 million Americans develop shingles, or herpes zoster. Distinguishable by a rash and blisters that most commonly occur on the torso -- chest and back -- waistline, upper arms or side of the face, shingles is caused by the same virus that causes chicken pox, the varicella-zoster virus.
One-in-five people diagnosed with shingles suffer complications resulting in PHN, or after-shingles pain resulting from nerve damage caused by the virus. PHN pain, which may last for months or sometimes even years, can be devastating to those it affects.
"PHN pain can erode a person's quality of life, especially for elderly patients," says Dr. Christopher Gharibo, director of Pain Medicine and assistant professor of Anesthesiology at NYU School of Medicine, "The pain can make everyday activities, like bathing or dressing, excruciating. Chronic pain often leads to serious depression. In fact, PHN is the most common cause of pain-related suicide in the elderly."
PHN disproportionately affects the 50-and-over population and people with weakened immune systems. In fact, shingles patients age 50 or older have a more than 50 percent chance of developing PHN, and patients age 80 or older have an 80 percent chance of developing the condition.
Ms. Jones urges, "If you are over 50 and have unexplained pain, ask your doctor if it might be from shingles." Early treatment for shingles could lessen or prevent the duration of shingles and lower the risk for PHN.
If you think you or someone you know might be suffering from shingles or PHN, talk to your doctor immediately.


text:
GeoBlue, formerly HTH Worldwide, is a leader and innovator serving the needs of world travelers. GeoBlue group travel health plans combine unsurpassed service with state-of-the-art mobile technology to help expatriates, their families and business travelers access trusted doctors and hospitals all around the globe.
Learn more about GeoBlue.
We're sorry, but there are no reviews for the current settings.


text:
Although Lela Killion had never been in a pageant before, when the Miss Dodge City and Miss Cowboy Capital Pageant came around, she seized the opportunity. "I realized how expensive [school] was and I thought 'Why not? What do I have to lose?'" Killion said. Killion came away from the pageant with a Miss Cowboy Capital title. Held on Jan. 4 in Dodge City, the Miss Dodge City and Miss Cowboy Capital pageant is a scholarship pageant where participants compete in a number of activities, including a swimwear competition, interview, evening wear, on-stage questions and talent. Through the pageant, $9,200 was raised in scholarship money for local college-bound students. There were a total of eight girls featured in the competition. Killion said the pageant went well. "It felt awesome to be there and feel so much love from the community," she said. To prepare, Killion practice her walk and speech, exercised and ate healthy foods, and prayed. A senior at Dodge City High School, she took steps to compete at the same level as her older peers. "I had to act a lot older than I really am and I had to practice being comfortable in my own skin," Killion said. "I thought, either way God's got it under control," she added. For Killion, faith was a big part of what got her through the competition. A non-denominational Christian, Killion notes her faith as one of the primary reasons for her success. "It's really changed my life and I think that's the main reason I won Miss Cowboy Capital is so I can be a light to people and so God can work through me," she said. Killion's platform was "Standing Strong In Purity." She said she chose the platform because she felt it was important for youth to be educated on why it's important to stay pure, and that it's OK to make decisions that are different from those of one's peers. For her talent, Killion preached about overcoming life struggles and coming out as a better person. "I chose it because that's what I'm good at," she said. "I like to have a special connection with a person especially when it draws them to God." To prepare for Miss Kansas in June, Killion will have to change her talent and has decided to play the flute, something she has been doing since fifth grade. By winning Miss Cowboy Capital, Killion earned 16 credit hours to Dodge City Community College, which she plans to use this summer. She also received $1,000 in scholarship money. Killion has been accepted to Manhattan Christian College, which she plans to attend in the fall. "I really just want to be a role model for kids in the community," Killion said. "I want them to know that they can do anything. It felt awesome to be supported and loved by them."
Location, ST | website.com


text:
Saint Louis University Leadership
Fred P. Pestello, Ph.D., is the 33rd president of Saint Louis University. The first permanent lay president in the University's nearly 200-year history, Dr. Pestello officially began his tenure at SLU on July 1, 2014.
As Saint Louis University's president and chief executive officer, Dr. Pestello leads one of the nation's oldest, largest and most prestigious Catholic universities with more than 13,500 students, 6,700 employees and a $1 billion endowment.
A Roman Catholic, Dr. Pestello is Jesuit educated and has spent the entirety of his 30-year career in Catholic higher education. A dynamic leader known for moving the institutions he serves forward, he brings extensive leadership experience to his role at Saint Louis University. Learn more about Dr. Pestello.


text:
Is there a centralized place/software where I can store all my chat logs? I switch computers a lot, and want one place to sign into to do all my chatting. I currently love Gmail because it can log all my AIM conversations as well, but I also chat through Facebook and other IM services and want them logged. I also used Meebo for a while, but there's no way I can export and save these logs.
closed as off-topic by Al E., jonsca♦ Jun 21 '15 at 8:52
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
Try using Trillian. It will let you login to mutliple chat clients, including g-chat, aim, facebook, twitter, etc. and gives you the option to log your chats. Not sure if the logs are exportable, but they are searchable.
Most multi-protocol desktop IM clients such as Adium, Pidgin, Trillian, Digsby, etc. keep local logs for all of your accounts, and most have an interface to search those logs. While this works well when you do most of your chatting from one computer, it's not server-based, and is not a perfect solution if you move computers a lot.
Facebook does not keep chat logs, or rather, does not make them available to you, so really the only way to log FB chats is with a 3rd party client.
I use Adium, which will do the job, too (on Mac OS X).
For Windows, I use Pidgin.
They're both all-in-one chat applications with logging functionality.
I recently starting using http://imo.im
It is web-based, multi-protocol chat handler that does video, audio, and text chatting via: MSN, Yahoo, AIM, gTalk, MySpace, Skype, and Facebook.
It save the chat history for all the clients in a easy to use interface.
I have been very happy with Digsby, it archives conversations that could be saved or exported elsewhere.
Try bitlbee if you have a ssh login with an irc client. It enables you to chat with your friends on MSN, ICQ, wherever and hanging around on IRC.
Also, you can use it locally with your graphical IRC client which proves the flexibility of this smart program, allowing you to keep your logs in a single place.


text:
Pistol grip air gun is the perfect tool for inaccessible and hard-to-reach areas
The pistol grip air gun is the perfect tool for cleaning benchtops, machinery, conveyors, grain elevators, rafters, pipes or other inaccessible and hard-to-reach areas. The unique nozzle on the pistol grip air gun boosts available thrust up to 100% and at the same time limits the pressure to less than 30 p.s.i. if the tip is blocked to meet OSHA safety standards. Cast aluminum pistol grip and extension make these air guns light and easy to handle. Couplers (Item 134227, sold separately) not included. Gun is 12" in length. USA made.
2016 Master Catalog: Page 603


text:
What Does 'Share and Share Alike' Mean?
Sign up
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
Adding to what cindi said, The American Heritage Dictionary of Idioms provides some background:
The Phrase Finder adds that the 1566 cite is to be found in the comedy Damon and Pythias by Richard Edwardes:
It goes on to say that the first recorded appearance of the phrase using the word alike is probably this one from Robinson Crusoe, 1719:
Share and everyone gets a piece. Share and share alike and everyone gets a piece the same size.


text:
Caution Statement:
Consult a doctor before starting any weight loss plan, especially if you have diabetes or other health problems, are under 18, pregnant, breastfeeding, or want to lose more than 30 pounds. Do not lose more than 2 pounds per week after the first week. Rapid weight loss may cause health problems. If you notice physical changes during weight loss such as dizziness, hair loss, or interruptions in menstrual cycle, you should talk to a doctor immediately.


text:
1TB USB Flash Drive? I think so!
Kingston reveals the current world's largest USB flash drive. 1TB and USB 3.0.
No price yet, but the 512GB version is on Newegg. See the price for yourself...
15 Answers answer
Wow, is all I can say about that. 1TB is a lot of space for a portable pocket drive.
I don't know. I'm not sure if I'd ever need a 1TB flash drive, I feel like I'd lose it, along with other ones I've misplaced. They end up somewhere, somehow, but that's a lot to lose.
I would almost rather have a portable external hard drive.
That's a bit over the $1 per Gig. rule.
Coming from someone who really keeps up on flash media prices... a "good deal" is ~$0.45/GB for USB 2.0 and ~$0.65/GB for USB 3.0. That's valid all the way up to 32GB. 64GB and above tend to carry a premium.
The 512GB is $800. Not sure why we're all being so secretive. ;)
give it 18 months and 512GB will probably be around $120.
Dang, I remember paying $50 for a 512MB flash drive.
Can't imagine having 1TB.
I'm embarrassed to think what I paid for this 4GB Sandisk USB drive on my desk. And I have a 2TB USB drive connected to my network that was probably about $100.
I can't imagine having that kind of portable storage. Though I am old enough to remember being STOKED upgrading our PC to a new, flashy, 40MB Western Digital Caviar drive. How could we ever use that much storage?!?!?!
One other concern: Data error and correction.
It has become common knowledge and practice that as density goes up, a single failure can prevent reading larger and larger data blocks. Likewise as individual transistor sizes shrink they are more vulnerable to radiation damage or quantum charge leakage.
While I certainly trust flash drives to retain their data, they don't have the active error correction or the data monitoring and write leveling of SSDs.
Before I commit mission critical data to a flash drive, I will make sure I have backup copies and I will also keep an MD5 hash of the file. Verify the file periodically to make sure it is intact, if it is really important.
Losing one bit out of 100s of megabytes would not matter in an image file or document. However, if the bit is lost in a chunk of executable code it could wreak havoc. If that bit altered part of a data in which every byte mattered, the loss could be troubling and hard to detect.
Just saying.
Right now I still see drives this large as a novelty. Between the cost and relatively slow speed (not awful, but certainly not great), any time I've wanted to use larger volumes i just use a $50 HDD and an enclosure. mkdosfs takes a few seconds and it's just as versatile as a flash drive so long as you can find 2 USB ports. Yeah, I'm not going to be taking it off roading on a dirtbike but I certainly won't lose it either, and if I did I wouldn't be tearing my hair out.
Look how big it is! I'm not sure I'd want that in my pocket.
Wow I might be able to fit my music collection on one flash drive.
@jha1223: LOL - I'm old enough to remember being thrilled at spending $400 for 8 MB (yea - megabytes) of RAM for my old Amiga 500 computer! And that was a bargain!
Added the 1TB beast to my cart at shop.kingston.com and saw $1,728.00 as my total price. Wow.


text:
Data persistency has recently become a really grip for me, especially how long to maintain database connectivity and how many connections are feasible for a given request. I've been using .NET; however, this is a generic question related to any lanaguage. From a .NET perspective, I'm connecting to database using EF4 and for a given website page I might create 6 connection per-request to render a page. The page might consist of news, stock prices, etc, and needs to be constantly updated.
I've recently been looking at unit-of-work (i.e. per request) approach. So basically when a request starts, if required a database connection is opened and destroyed upon end of the request. I'm not convinced it's the best approach yet. I'm looking for opinions and experience on it.


text:
STEUBENVILLE - Juanita Slappy couldn't stop smiling Friday as she sat in a pew at Second Baptist Church on Adams Street, waiting for the other members of the Martin Luther King Memorial Mass Choir to assemble for practice.
"I love it," she said. "It's a blessing to be here, it really is. I look forward to it every year."
The interfaith choir will anchor the community's Martin Luther King birthday celebration, just as it has done every year since 1970.
Article Photos
REHEARSING — Members of the Martin Luther King Memorial Mass Choir rehearsed Saturday evening at Second Baptist Church in Steubenville. - Linda Harris
Founder Delores Wiggins, minister of music, said the group will join other area choirs at 6 p.m. Saturday in Second Baptist Church for the Martin Luther King Gospel Extravaganza. The program will include a duet by Attilio Boni and Rita Kilmartin; musical selections by Juliette Hamilton and Cynthia Smith; recitations by Lela Poole and Ivy Kirtdoll; mimes and performances by the Quinn AME Senior Choir as well as other musical guests.
Wiggins said it's been a joyous experience, "especially when you focus on what we're doing it for."
"Martin Luther King was a man of vision, actually, for all people" she said. "When you think about Martin Luther King's legacy, especially his 'Dream' that all people will be together as one ... we haven't reached that goal yet, but it's a goal that's very dear to me."
Wiggins said the choir is comprised of volunteers from the different religious communities that make up Steubenville. "There's always new faces," she added, noting that two members - Slappy and Lela Poole - have been with her from the beginning.
Together, they'll be performing several powerful spirituals and hymns, including "The Lord's Prayer," "For God So Loved the World" and "Holy, Holy."
"I'd been in a choir on and off, at different functions, but she formed the Martin Luther King Choir and we've been singing together ever since," said Slappy, who said she gladly gave her time during the past 43 years "because of what it stands for, and to help keep his dream alive, a remembrance of him and what he stood for."
On Sunday the group will perform several selections at a 6 p.m. ecumenical service at Second Baptist Church. Pastor Rick Sherrer of Mount Pleasant Baptist Church, Cincinnati, will be the guest speaker.
Also performing during the Sunday ecumenical service will be the Martin Luther King Children's Choir, which Wiggins also started some 15 or 20 years ago.
The children's choir, directed by Lisa Thomas and made up of 5-to-13-year-old youth from throughout the community, also will be featured at a Saturday morning children's program at the Martin Luther King Center.
"That's what it's about, the children," Wiggins said.
She added the choir will meet for practice again at 6 p.m. Friday at Second Baptist.
"Martin Luther King's 'dream' is very dear to me as we fight discrimination and disparity every day," Wiggins said, pointing out the celebration is sponsored by the Martin Luther King Association. "It's amazing how some of us are still living in the '30s and '40s, not realizing this is a new day."
James Baber is president of the association.


text:
I am starting to invest a little more money into my photography business. I've gone from a hobbyist to being asked to take professional shots, so I have the lights and other equipment. I'm upgrading to a new camera soon and was wondering about the differences in the photo editing programs everyone suggests - Adobe Photoshop, Gimp, Piknic, or even the software that comes with a new camera?
If you don't have it, I'd recommend Adobe Lightroom and then use Gimp for the occasional 'advanced' edit. Most of the reasons are already outlined in this question. Photoshop is nice, but its not meant to deal with the huge number of photographs you can do from a real shoot. Its a workflow thing.
I find 90%+ of the basic tweaks I need can be done in Lightroom. Its a faster, more efficient workflow. Lightroom is designed for you to make all the small tweaks to your photos fast and efficiently without worrying about changing files around, 'saving' new copies, or changing your mindset for every picture. It saves your changes in metadata and then reconstructs the changes from the metadata instead of saving an altered photo. You 'run' from photo to photo in Lightroom, making the changes quickly or even applying batch changes for whole sets of photos. Its much faster. For the every 'blue moon' edit that I need that Lightroom can't do, you can set the Gimp to be an editor in Lightroom.
It (the Gimp) may lack some of the really advanced features of Photoshop, but in general its pretty suitable. There are plugins for many features (like the content aware fill is provided somewhat by the resynthesizer plugin). We have another question on the differences of Gimp vs Photoshop already. The UI is often a big complaint and can take some getting used to, but after some usage - its acceptable to me.
As Sean points out in a comment above, Adobe Elements is also an option. Its got many of the features of Photoshop, at a fraction of the price.
Piknic and any online editor just isn't in the same class. They're far, far too slow to work with at any real scale.
As far as 'worth it' goes - that's something only you can decide given the benefits and differences above.
At the very least, download a trial of Lightroom and Photoshop. And download an actual copy of Gimp. Start your workflow in Lightroom and see how often you think you need to even go to another editor.
If you have to ask, then Photoshop is NOT worth the money.
Only if you need Photoshop, will it ever be worth the money. It is expensive because people who use it find that it pays them back easily.
If you do not know what you need, then you do not need Photoshop.
Photoshop is a tool that can help you solve problems and create creative solutions in your photography business. It is not required for a photography business and Photoshop will NOT make you a 'professional' photographer. Photoshop is complex, powerful, non-intuitive, and flexible.
So then the question is, How do I know I need Photoshop?:
If you need to crop, adjust curves, sharpen etc, then Lightroom is a much better choice.
This depends of what do you want. I mean, Photoshop is more complex and offers a wide range of tools and techniques for photo editing, giving more control over the photo.
If your purpose is only to edit photos quickly, easily, maintaining the complete history of the changes applied without altering the original file, I recommend you Ligthroom. These are some advantages of using Ligthroom over Photoshop:
For beginners Lightroom is the best choice with the best results.
The actually is a version of Photoshop that IS worth the money and that is Photoshop Elements. It has most of the features that Photoshop has, but not all, to a fraction of the price. Check it out before you decide.
Good luck! /B
Photoshop is probably not worth the money, try Artweaver first.
Artweaver is another free package - but out of all the free ones I've tried, its the one that feels most like Photoshop ...
It supports the PSD format and if you pay the $29 for the 'plus' version it will allow you to Photoshop filters.


text:
June 05, 2010
Bafana Bafana beat Denmark
Bafana Bafana fans at Super Stadium. Photo courtesy awisto
Bafana Bafana continued their winning ways when they beat Denmark 1-0 at Super Stadium in Tshwane this afternoon.
Striker Katlego Mphela scored the only goal of the match in the 75th minute, to give the South African team and supporters much confidence going into the 2010 FIFA World Cup™. South Africa's first match is in the World Cup's opening game against Mexico at Soccer City in Soweto on Friday.
See a full match schedule for the tournament.
In Cape Town, 2010 FIFA World Cup™ fever has clearly arrived. Soccer fans from across the Mother City are flooding local shops to purchase football merchandise and show their support.
At the V&A Waterfront this afternoon, hundreds of fans gathered at the amphitheatre and screamed every time Bafana Bafana came close to scoring. When one was finally netted, the Waterfront erupted in celebration, giving an indication of the festivities to come in the next few weeks.
See two photo essays of the South Africa vs Denmark game:
South Africa beat Denmark: Photos from the game


text:
Pick a C*-algebra $A$ and call a (*-)endomorphism $\alpha:A\to A$ nontrivial if it is injective and $\alpha(A)\neq A$.
Question: Do there exist infinite dimensional C*-algebras with no nontrivial endomorphisms?
I'm particularly interested in the case of simple C*-algebras, but any example would do. In the commutative case the first part of this boils down to the following.
Question: Does there exist a locally compact Hausdorff space $X$ (with infinitely many points) for which every continuous surjection $X\to X$ is automatically injective?
I'm not sure such a space can exist, but it would necessarily be quite exotic: topological manifolds will not suffice (just work locally).


text:
The Princess Bride (DVD) for $4.99
A lowly stable boy, Westley (Cary Elwes), pledges his love to the beautiful Buttercup (Robin Wright), only to be abducted and reportedly killed by pirates while Buttercup is betrothed to the evil Prince Humperdinck. Even as Buttercup herself is kidnapped by a giant, a scheming criminal mastermind, and a master Spanish swordsman, a mysterious masked pirate follows in pursuit.
The wild and woolly arcs of the story, the sudden twists of fate, and, above all, the cartoon-scaled characters all work because of Goldman's very funny script, Reiner's confident direction, and a terrific cast. Elwes and Wright, both sporting their best English accents, juggle romantic fervor and physical slapstick effortlessly, while supporting roles boast Mandy Patinkin (the swordsman Inigo Montoya), Wallace Shawn (the incredulous schemer Vizzini), and Christopher Guest (evil Count Rugen) with brief but funny cameos from Billy Crystal, Carol Kane, and Peter Cook. --Sam Sutherland
Free Shipping with Prime..
11 Comments add a comment
Princess Bride is a wonderful family film.
Have fun Stormin' da castle!
@mkentosh: Think it'll work?
"When I was your age, television was called books."
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means!
Best. Film. EVER!
Add a comment? "As you wish".
@gt0163c: It would take a miracle. (Can't believe everyone else left you hanging on that line.)
"Who are you?"
"No one of consequence."
"I must know."
"Get used to disappointment."
"Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die."
An epic line for an epic film.
Great to watch after a party while you wait for someone to stop drunkenly rolling around in your bathroom floor. Excellent movie.
"You seem a decent fellow," Inigo said. "I hate to kill you."
You seem a decent fellow," answered the man in black. "I hate to die."