brabus

I was looking at the new Dead Air Wolfman - it can be reduced to 5” and 9.8 oz (from 7.5”/14.4oz),which would be helpful on the pistols. It covers the calibers I’m most interested in suppressing (9mm, 223, 300 AAC). Then I’ll have to tell my wife how I had to get a new pistol red dot sight because I don’t have suppressor height sights...it’s not my fault, I didn’t have a choice!

I also have thought about the “coolness wears off” factor. That said, my two functional reasons for still considering them are: - Less noise for my neighbors/my kid’s hearing (my hearing is already fucked, so no factor there!) I’ve shot several suppressed weapons and am fully aware of how wrong the movies are, but they still can make a decent difference, depending on obvious factors. The 9mm pistol and the .300 Blackout rifle I shot with subs were very quiet (relatively). - The suppressor would help in a HD scenario, in terms of less flash/noise, leading to lower risk of overloading senses and reducing shooter performance.

Any guys with suppressors on here? I keep waffling on it, mostly wondering is it worth it... - cost (meh, not that big of a factor, but do I do this or get another rifle?) - All the NFA bullshit with the ATF (timeline, paperwork, etc.) - Paranoid about becoming a “registered” gun owner on some NFA list. Though obviously I’ve been background checked by the FBI many times for gun purchases, so maybe this isn’t any different?

Found the root cause of your friend’s problem. The good news is the fix is easy!

Yeah, 20 years of family business experience in a blue collar/welfare heavy area. Seen hundreds of employees over the years - about 2/3 will do whatever it takes to stay on welfare, including not showing up for work or full up quitting (because they don’t want to go over X hours, which would then make them ineligible for welfare). Even when offered health insurance if they work 40 hrs/wk, they refuse because they’ll just go to the ER sans insurance for everything from a sniffle to actual emergencies. “The hospital is free man, I don’t need insurance!” And those are the people getting a couple grand from the gov and spending it on weed and booze. The other 1/3 work their ass off and make really good money considering what they do, have health insurance, etc...but they’re not on welfare, and that’s a deal breaker for the other 2/3. Talk to any small business in a blue collar area and you’ll hear similar stories, though I’m sure region drives some differences. Ironically the worst offenders in our family’s experience are 1st Gen Americans; their parents worked their asses off/went through substantial hardship to get their family to America, only to raise entitled, lazy children with no work ethic; blows my mind. I think there’s tons of abuse of that system. I don’t agree with guys getting disability while continuing to essentially do the same job/pretty much live an unencumbered life. But there are plenty of legitimate cases out there where people have life long effects on their physical ability to do things, are in constant pain, etc. They served their country and will suffer consequences of that service for the rest of their life - that’s legit disability. the construction worker could have chosen a gov job that came with disability options at the end...but he didn’t, so irrelevant in terms of making a “fairness” comparison. Lastly to be clear, I support social safety nets and agree there are lots of people in need who aren’t defined by the 2/3 example above, but our current system breeds the 2/3, so we need to look at ways to discourage said behavior while still having support for people who truly need it. Easier said than done, but the status quo is a shit show.

I didn’t imply any legal action by the ACLU (you inferred that, incorrectly), and the ACLU has taken notice and does not support what’s going on with the tech giants. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election/trump-capitol-riot-twitter-ban-aclu-b1785626.html. ACLU: ”it should concern everyone when companies like Facebook and Twitter wield the unchecked power to remove people from platforms that have become indispensable for the speech of billions...It is our hope that these companies will apply their rules transparently to everyone.” Glad to hear you support the baker from a legal standpoint.

@Negatory There you go again responding without actually reading what I wrote. I never brought legality or the constitution into my statement even remotely, I simply said picking and choosing who is suppressed (e.g. double standard) is what most people are pissed about. The group who actually think Twitter did something illegal/unconstitutional is wrong (we agree there). I hope you vehemently support the Christian baker who refused to bake a cake for a gay couple.

Tons of “homeboys” exist who don’t see full time employment as their preferred option to get money - they prefer govt social programs instead (and only supplement as little as possible with an actual job). That’s the type of people the current system produces, and the type who shouldn’t receive direct payment. The system needs an overhaul, so I guess don’t hate the player, hate the game?

I’ve seen social media/news splattered with “getting kicked off for violating a TOS isn’t suppressing free speech, get over it cry babies!” What these people haven’t grasped is the majority are pissed about the double standard. Kick Trump off, that’s fine, but you better be kicking everyone else off too who violates TOS, regardless of political leaning, party affiliation, group affiliation, etc. If you don’t and are choosing to punt people off your platform you disagree with politically while looking the other way for people you do agree with, well that’s suppression. The double standard is what people are pissed about - to the point the ACLU is concerned about it, and the Twitter CEO admitted they need to work on being more uniform across the board because not doing so is dangerous. I’m sure Jack only said that to save face after the recent backlash.

That’s been happening forever thanks to out of control social programs. The recent stimulus checks are just another iron in the fire to perpetuate what has already been happening. Great post.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200903/coronavirus-on-surfaces-whats-the-real-risk He’s not “dead wrong;” sure it is possible as jazz pointed out, but it’s not the primary way it spreads/infects...the CDC and the medical community support that. The above article explains in layman terms why it’s very low odds.

That sucks; hasn’t happened here, at least yet. Still haven’t done a single guard PT test in PT gear or in the AD-style group method.

It’s still a thousand times better than AD, despite the bullshit alcohol policies that exist in some places. And you’re crazy if you think there aren’t creative solutions out there...

Stick with the UPT boards - patience.

Badass, good on him.

Let’s start with your original comment that generated a reply: “what if they only made $25B? What if only $25M?” Once again your opinion-driven math vs. actual math isn’t based in reality, per the example I gave...she sure as shit isn’t donating $9B if she only makes $25M; my 5 year old can do that math. And if she’s making $25B, then doubtful she’s donating 36% of her income that year (and her net worth would be less overall, more reason she wouldn’t donate as much). In fact, your article talks about how huge it was for bezos to pledge 10% of his wealth (at the time he did). Go ahead, show me “your reality” where a Billionaire has taken a 50% income /worth cut and then followed up with the same multi-billion $ donations after the fact, that matched previous donations before the 50% cut. Oh and also their loss didn’t impact companies, employees, etc.

Fair point. My follow up question/thought is once the high risk are vaccinated (assumption is that group is fairly open to/diligent about getting vaccinated), then will the lower risk group who remains unvaccinated really drain resources (because that’s also the same group who is hospitalized at a significantly lower rate)? Is the unvaccinated population the root cause, or is it the gov enacting policies that aren’t rational (especially in the near future as high risk populations are vaccinated), but don’t affect them personally/even benefit them in some ways? It behooves people to be skeptical when the gov says, “just do this because we said so, or else (fill in threats...)!” The above is to generate thought/discussion, not an argument...since it can be difficult to tell by words alone.

95% effective at reducing/eliminating symptoms, but we have no idea if the vaccine stops transmission (we’re assuming no until proven otherwise). So honest question, why are we so concerned with 80% of people getting the shots - as you put it, let Darwin take its course. If people get their shots and are protected, then why do they care if their neighbor does? In theory you have the full vaccination and I sneeze in your face, you’re protected at a 95% rate...this point has even more efficacy if the vaccine doesn’t stop transmission (unknown currently).

Well for one people like MacKenzie Scott probably wouldn’t have donated $9B. Yeah there are some “filthy rich” people, but many of them donate shitloads of money, collectively provide millions of jobs, etc. They may be “selfish” in your eyes, but that doesn’t mean they’re not simultaneously contributing a substantial amount to our economy and way of life. Bottom line - not a zero sum game and we need those people far more than we don’t need them.

It will help as it further emphasizes you’re committed/have a passion for aviation, but don’t crush yourself with debt to make it happen (your current hours and ratings show you’re obviously committed to flying). I agree rushing in person is a great way to show who you are, as paper can only paint so much of the picture (in person is your opportunity to “fight” the impression that you’re too young/immature). Put the effort in as you clearly intend to do, but don’t get discouraged if it takes a little bit...you have plenty of time, and good things will come from patience and persistence.

Agree with Elvis - you have some solid stuff there, but while applying to units initially, go get a civ job. The most likely situation is you’re working civ for a couple years (while applying/interviewing for an ARC pilot job) before you get hired. It’s tough to hire a 20 yr old with no real world experience, but not saying it’s impossible. Don’t let this discourage you, you have some great qualifications; you’ll turn 22 with a couple years in post-college employment before you know it (and with exponentially higher chances of getting hired).

I did use it, and my soil is a decent amount of clay. Sounds like you would probably be fine with the same method if you have continuous flow (doesn’t take much to keep it full). To be clear, I did not do a pond liner, but I’ve been told that’s generally a good idea for smaller ponds and places with sandy soil (which my geographic area does have places that are sandy). I didn’t catch the first time that you were doing an acre (fuck lining that much!) During a couple month hot streak with no rain, the pond has lost about 1-1.5 ft of depth, but it filled up quickly after a few days of heavy rain. My continuous flow is a spring, with extra flow during spring melt and heavy rains.

Already exists with several more on the way (F-35). Unless you’re taking specifically within AFGSC, then I’ll defer on that.

Until you sign paperwork accepting your AD rated slot (via OTS), you’re not obligated to shit. Maybe it’s even after that point, but not before (I do know you can turn down an OTS slot if you don’t like the AFSC offered). So do what you want, but I wouldn’t have an issue telling that recruiter you’ve seen the light and are all in for AD (while continuing to apply for guard units). Take the first rated offer that comes your way. Your recruiter sounds like he’s being lazy, like a lot of recruiters.