|
Post by Clint Johnston on Jan 19, 2013 18:18:30 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Clint Johnston on Jan 24, 2013 23:56:41 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Jan 25, 2013 0:23:42 GMT 1
It's about time we put tariffs on goods made in these shitholes so high that it would be cheaper to bring the jobs back here. These labour practices should be punished not rewarded with continued sales.
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on Jan 25, 2013 4:43:49 GMT 1
It's about time we put tariffs on goods made in these shitholes so high that it would be cheaper to bring the jobs back here. These labour practices should be punished not rewarded with continued sales. I've said before that NAFTA is seriously fucking both the US and Canada over. A combination of a NAFTA repeal and the public realizing that pushing buttons on an assembly line isn't a 60k/yr + benefits job would go a long way to fixing many of the economic issues we're facing. Another would be these college kids who get "business management" degrees and want a mid-level 6-figure per year job starting out being made to understand that they first have to know how to do the job and how the business actually works before being placed in a management position. Sorry for the rant, but my dad just recently called me to bitch about the unskilled job he took to supplement his pension from the State not giving him a paid vacation or paying him more than $9.00/hr. This from the same man who told me that non-skilled labor jobs don't rate those kind of benefits all my life before I enlisted.
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Jan 25, 2013 11:16:49 GMT 1
It's always a question of balance. Thing did get a little ridiculous where a man could be paid 40/hour to tighten 8 nuts on an assembly line. One could almost argue that the jobs needed to be outsourced for a bit to give an object lesson. the unions are not likely to learn this lesson. Your dad and mine would have gotten along except mine did not bitch about the lack of benefits attached to his Commissionaires job where he was paid less an hour to do relatively important work at a police station than I am now.
Do they teach anything in "business management" other than how to add 1+1? I could probably spend an afternoon on the phone and fill in the gaps in my knowledge of running a restaurant. Provided it was unlicensed. I never dealt with the booze side of things.
More companies should be like where Lily works. Her base wage isn't the greatest but the performance based incentives are enough to give some seriously good supplements to your wages. The stock options give a quarterly bonus depending on how the company as a whole is doing, plus you get extra shares if you are one of the better performers. Sales are not directly required but making them gives extra money each month.
this as opposed to a typical union job where the only real requirement is showing up and you are treated as well as the best workers based on "seniority." Having Seniority just means no has found a reason to fire you. It does not mean you are actually doing top shelf work to get a top shelf wage.
Bah! There is my rant. Maybe I am still a little pissed from last years transit strike.
|
|
|
Post by Clint Johnston on Jan 30, 2013 15:04:02 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on Jan 30, 2013 15:37:13 GMT 1
It's possible, though the odds of it happening are nuts. Boar skulls are tough as hell and have been known to deflect bullets if the bullet strikes at a bad angle Considering that the guy killed was nearly a mile and a half away, either someone is a damn good shot (as in better than nearly every military sniper in the world) and a shitty liar or this is one of those one in a trillion freak accidents. I'll lean towards the latter in that deliberately hitting the driver of a car in the head through the windshield while the car is moving at a mile and a half is one hell of a feat in marksmanship. I'm willing to wager that the number of people who can make a shot like that with a typical hunting rifle can be counted on one hand with fingers to spare.
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Jan 30, 2013 15:42:54 GMT 1
Something smells here.
First we are talking a pretty low angle of fire so how did the bullet ricochet in such an angle as it traveled upward and away? Secondly, boars are really really tough animals but no penetration by the bullet at all. Is there any precedent for this? Thirdly, even from a rifle, I would expect a loss of velocity and stopping power over a distance of 2 km, yet it somehow ricocheted off an animal (losing some it's energy there) arced upwards (losing more) traveled 2 KM (losing more yet) passed through a tempered glass windshield (losing even more) and still retained killing power.
What do you think Iron?
Edit, Iron ninja'd me.
Edit 2, I wouldn't suggest that the shot was deliberate just not happening in quite that wacky way.
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on Jan 30, 2013 15:50:01 GMT 1
Something smells here. First we are talking a pretty low angle of fire so how did the bullet ricochet in such an angle as it traveled upward and away? Secondly, boars are really really tough animals but no penetration by the bullet at all. Is there any precedent for this? Thirdly, even from a rifle, I would expect a loss of velocity and stopping power over a distance of 2 km, yet it somehow ricocheted off an animal (losing some it's energy there) arced upwards (losing more) traveled 2 KM (losing more yet) passed through a tempered glass windshield (losing even more) and still retained killing power. What do you think Iron? Edit, Iron ninja'd me. See my post above yours. Boar skulls are very tough and if you hit at a bad angle, the bullet will deflect. Hell, I know of bullets deflecting off of human skulls when they hit at a bad angle (and I'm talking service-caliber weapons). It's rare but not unheard of. For the bullet to travel two kilometers it would have had to deflect upward and into the air. On its way down, the bullet would be regaining some of its lost velocity. Passing through the windshield would have killed a lot of the bullet's momentum, but you also have to consider the momentum of the driver in the car moving toward the bullet. Even if the bullet didn't penetrate the guy's skull, it could have retained enough momentum (combined with the car/driver's momentum) to break the skull and cause a fatal injury.
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Jan 30, 2013 15:58:59 GMT 1
FAir enough.
Suspecting anything else outside of possible negligence is pointless without a connection between shooter and victim. No sign of that either.
It's just crazy.
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on Jan 30, 2013 16:08:42 GMT 1
I'm sure that hunter will get hit with negligence charges. Like I said, it's extremely unlikely that it was deliberate: this is some Final Destination shit.
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on Jan 30, 2013 16:14:14 GMT 1
And on reflection it looks like the bullet went through the driver's side window, not the windshield which makes it more unlikely this was deliberate due to the nature of making a shot on a target moving across one's field of view at that speed and range.
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Jan 30, 2013 16:24:59 GMT 1
With it not being the windshield it makes it more likely to penetrate at distance too.
Side windows are neither as thick nor as tempered.
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Jan 30, 2013 17:09:16 GMT 1
I'm sure that hunter will get hit with negligence charges. Like I said, it's extremely unlikely that it was deliberate: this is some Final Destination shit. Those should be dropped if the circumstances really were as presented. 2 KM is a hell of a distance for any small arm let alone a civilian rifle. That is a pretty wide zone away from a road. In Canada you only need worry about not deliberately shooting across a road or highway. Also, never discharge a weapon with 200 yards of an occupied building. This guy was experienced. Unlikely he would have done either by accident.
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on Jan 30, 2013 17:21:51 GMT 1
I'm sure that hunter will get hit with negligence charges. Like I said, it's extremely unlikely that it was deliberate: this is some Final Destination shit. Those should be dropped if the circumstances really were as presented. 2 KM is a hell of a distance for any small arm let alone a civilian rifle. That is a pretty wide zone away from a road. In Canada you only need worry about not deliberately shooting across a road or highway. Also, never discharge a weapon with 200 yards of an occupied building. This guy was experienced. Unlikely he would have done either by accident. It's the same here in the US. Not sure what France's laws are, thought.
|
|