User Profile: mastice


Member Since: November 12, 2010


123 To page: Go
  • [11] January 28, 2015 at 12:18pm

    I question the 90% kill ratio in one year but I don’t doubt that it would be high. I just don’t think it would be that high. When I was a kid my father used to say that if a new great depression ever hits this country we are going to be in far worse condition than the previous one of the 1930s. The reason for that being most people in this country a) already were living rather frugal livelihoods, and b) the majority of the population lived in the rural areas and were able to produce their own food in some limited fashion. Today the opposite is correct; a) most of us throw out things and buy new instead of reusing them, and b) the largest portion of our population lives in the urban areas now.

    The sudden loss of electricity would have the same effect as another Great Depression on this country. While many would freak out and not be able to cope I do think that more than 10% of our population would find a way to survive. Just my two cents.

    Responses (6) +
  • [1] January 28, 2015 at 11:46am

    They used to show pictures like these when I was in school in an attempt to stop us from smoking. (back in the late ’80s and early ’90s) Little good that did. I stilled picked up the habit and smoked 1+ packs a day for 18 years before I quit 4 years ago using e-cigs. I’d hate to see what my lungs look like now. :)

    But in all seriousness, this information has been out there for a very long time. If you smoke cigarettes today you know the risks to your health by now.

    Responses (1) +
  • January 28, 2015 at 11:43am

    American Lung Association says different. But it’s not to say you are wrong, I’m just pointing out that there are conflicting reports out there on this concerning the harmful effects of marijuana.

  • [3] January 27, 2015 at 2:55pm

    So what? They’re still inanimate objects that are completely harmless.

  • [3] January 27, 2015 at 2:52pm

    Common sense ain’t so common….

  • [15] January 25, 2015 at 1:31pm

    [[”I respect their right to free speech but they don’t have to be hateful,” she told the Times. “It’s like the ‘N-word’ for blacks.”]]

    From a logical, and purely English language standpoint, this argument is invalid and wrong. Why? Because the “n-word” has no other meaning than as a derogatory term directed at a specific group of people. The word “illegal” is used to describe many more things in life than just people who come here against our laws. (because according to the word illegal means exactly that, against written law)

    But leave it to people (mostly on the left) who use their “feelings” instead of rational thought.

  • [5] January 24, 2015 at 10:04pm

    I think I watched 3-4 episodes once on Netflix. I agree ORPatriot. I didn’t like him on the show either. He really did act like an arrogant jerk. But… people are still supposed to be innocent until proven guilty and he hasn’t been found guilty yet. So I’ll reserve my opinion on his actions until after he has had his trial.

  • [2] January 24, 2015 at 2:19pm

    All good points for the most part. #1 is easy to answer though. There is already a system in place for chain of evidence for the camera footage. We use the same system that is used for dashboard cameras. Hasn’t been a widespread issue to date with that so carry it over.

  • [2] January 24, 2015 at 2:17pm

    This is a prime example of what I was talking about several weeks back. (can’t remember if it was here or elsewhere) I think all law enforcement should wear body cams while on duty. I know there is some opposition to the idea but those people are using the same arguments that were used when dashboard cameras first started coming out. (and those arguments were proven false) Look how much good has come from dashboard camera footage when proving or disputing traffic stops or high speed pursuits over the years. Furthermore, of course there are always exceptions to the rule, but time and time again we have see attitudes of both the officer, and the person being interacted with, change when they know they are being recorded. They become more civilized and polite with one another. In short, the goods far outweigh the bads in my opinion. Body cams not only help those being stopped by forcing police to rethink their approaches in some cases, but also protects good officers from false accusations. (like in Ferguson)

  • [7] January 23, 2015 at 11:16pm

    I would agree with him to the extent that we have gone from the frugal days of our elder generation to a “throw it and buy new because of one small flaw” society… but for someone like this to go around lecturing us about it? The word hypocrisy doesn’t do enough justice to how absurd it sounds coming from his mouth.

    He can give away his fortunes and live a simple life first… then he can tell others to do it.

  • January 23, 2015 at 10:33pm

    WarMunger_AI; you misunderstand. While I do agree with you, I am not debating the law or holding it up on a pedestal as a perfect system. Iowa, like many other states, still has a long ways to go yet. I was merely citing existing gun laws here in the state.

    But I can’t sell it short either. Compared to other states, Iowa is not as bad as some. The big victory for gun rights came a few years back when we changed from a “may issue” (which was dependent on the local sheriff’s opinion on guns and the person – in other words, in these small towns if the Sheriff hated your brother for teasing him in school you weren’t getting a permit) to a “shall issue” system that forbids local sheriffs, many of whom are pro-gun control, from discriminating against anyone. The only thing that can deny you a permit is the failure of a criminal background check. Iowa also doesn’t require actual gun registration. Nor is there a so called ‘assault weapons’ ban, magazine limit, permits required for long guns, or limits on how many guns you can buy in a year.

    You also have to remember that only a handful of states are left that don’t require a permit to purchase a handgun so, while I agree with what you are saying completely, it is not an uncommon practice.

    But again… Iowa does have a ways to go yet. It’s not perfect and it requires a constant vigilance. But it’s better than some places.

  • January 23, 2015 at 9:00pm

    I spent about 4 years working a receiving dock for a manufacturing company about 15 years ago. Part of that job was to not only receive to in large trucks and unload them, but also unload the major residential carriers. (USPS, UPS, FedEx, etc) I swear sometimes the packages we got in looked like they went through a ringer. Boxes clearly marked ‘fragile’ or ‘this side up’ were commonly placed on the bottom of large stacks or just thrown whichever way they would fit in the truck. Anyone who thinks these shipping companies actually pay attention to the labels on the boxes is fooling themselves. Oh they may claim they do, and I’m sure there are a few good people who try their best to follow instructions, but the vast majority of the delivery people are just like this in the video.

    Now that I run my own business, which ships worldwide, I have to be mindful of this and deal with the results of poor package handling on a constant basis. It seems to be a never ending headache but what do you do? Price of shipping an item in today’s world I guess.

    (I do agree though, handler needs to be held responsible in this case)

  • [2] January 22, 2015 at 11:52pm

    I should clarify before someone get’s the wrong idea. Iowa is a “shall issue” state. You have to obtain a license to purchase a handgun (but not long guns) or you have to have a permit to carry. (that can be used instead of a permit to buy to purchase a handgun) There is no gun registration for long guns or handguns. We have a state preemption law which says state laws trump local laws on firearms. And while we do not have a castle doctrine per say, we do have civil immunity for any action deemed ‘reasonable force’ in self defense. I wanted to clarify because I reread my post above and I made it sound like anyone could just open carry or conceal carry. Which is not the case, we still have to pass a background check to get a permit.

    Responses (2) +
  • [7] January 22, 2015 at 11:40pm

    I’m not familiar with Florida law so I’m basing this comment off of Iowa law, which I’m sure is different. In Iowa there is no mandate to carry concealed, although for discretion purposes most people do. Open carry is allowed at any time. However businesses can ask you to leave if they don’t want a firearm on their property. In fact, just last week I saw an elderly gentleman at our local grocery store loading groceries into his car with a fully visible revolver on his hip. (yeah, like an old school cowboy one, I thought it was kind of cool to see someone carrying one that wasn’t at some wild west show or something)

    While I am sure that Mr. Foster thought he was doing the right thing he obviously went about it the wrong way. If he was really concerned about what was going on then he should have kept a safe distance and taken a moment to observe the situation. If Mr. Daniels was acting strangely or nervous then I would say Mr. Foster definitely should have contacted law enforcement or store security. Not go all Rambo on the guy and put others in danger by escalating a situation suddenly.

    Like the elderly gentleman I spotted here. The gun caught my eye as he was loading groceries. I stopped, assessed the situation and determined that it wasn’t a threat. Went along with my grocery shopping. Sometimes cool headed observation is all that is needed.

    But I know that is lost on a lot of people today…

    Responses (1) +
  • January 22, 2015 at 6:00pm


    That’s an awfully broad statement that none of us know what we are talking about. How do you know none of us, who have commented, haven’t been touched by depression or mental illness either in ourselves or our loved ones? How do you know any of us haven’t been touched by the death of someone at the hands of suicide?

    I think you, and TheCopt, are missing the point that is being raised but I will say that you are right on one thing. We don’t really know what demons this young lady wrestled with. It could have been the point that puremagix raised and merely that she couldn’t cope with real life after being sheltered. (a legitimate point) Or it could have been something more sinister like rape or abuse. The problem is that it is open for speculation because there is little information outside of saying “she was depressed” as to why she took her own life. The Daily Mail shares more info that TheBlaze here but there are still a lot of unanswered questions.

    I can tell you, having dealt with this and seen it first hand in loved ones, that depression is usually triggered by something. It doesn’t just happen out of the blue one day when you wake up. That something could be as small as not being able adjust to new surroundings or something as Earth shattering as a death of a loved one.

    The point is, it’s a complex issue and all avenues of what that trigger was for this young lady is fair game given the lack of information provided.

  • [9] January 22, 2015 at 3:15pm

    The transformation of TheBlaze into The Huffington Post is nearly complete. I can respect that, even if I don’t agree with it.

    Responses (1) +
  • [20] January 22, 2015 at 1:11pm

    TheCopt; I don’t mean to sound heartless either but I think puremaix makes a valid point and raises a legitimate question. Furthermore, name calling is uncalled for and doesn’t further your opposition to his/her comment.

    Not to diminish the severity of the situation I will say that it is a tragedy what happened to this poor young lady. As a parent I cannot even begin to imagine the pain she caused her family by checking out this way.

    But I too immediately wondered if part of her depression might have been brought on by being sheltered or pampered too much as a child. I too wondered if the first instance of real life she got, however short it was, didn’t meet up to her expectations and depressed her to the point where she would do something like this.

    There is nothing wrong with questioning that either. Consider that before you pop off at someone and start calling them names. ;)

  • [29] January 21, 2015 at 11:41am

    There has to be more to this story that isn’t being told by the wife or husband. Unless you are completely nuts you don’t wake up, go out and rent a heavy piece of machinery, and tear down your house on a whim. It’s like domestic abuse situations, it’s always an escalating act. It doesn’t just happen overnight. There are usually warning signs or a buildup of some kind to the violent act. Maybe these two were not arguing this day but maybe they argued a lot and he finally just snapped… who knows.

    Responses (6) +
  • January 16, 2015 at 4:06pm

    You know what would solve the whole debate over whether or not the cop had his lights on? A HUD of some sort in the video camera system (kind of like date/time on your home camera) that is attached to the patrol car that reports basic things like: Siren = On/Off, Emergency Lights = On/Off, Vehicle Speed, etc, etc, etc. I can see where this would be beneficial to law enforcement across the board during disputes. Think of it as a CYA type of system.

  • [1] January 16, 2015 at 1:25pm

    “what do you think happens in nature?”

    A fox doesn’t shoot the rabbit 4 times then let it sit there suffering while he calls his buddies to come enjoy the fun of ripping it apart. Furthermore, it’s not a PC issue to be outraged over this and it’s not some newfangled idea. I was taught decades ago to respect the hunt and to respect the animal that you harvest.

    Responses (1) +
123 To page: Go