Giving photogs a bad name?

On 5/22/2014 11:37 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-05-23 03:02:55 +0000, James Silverton
said:

On 5/22/2014 10:53 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-05-23 02:41:23 +0000, Robert Coe said:

On Wed, 21 May 2014 17:57:20 -0400, James Silverton
wrote:
: On 5/21/2014 5:29 PM, George Kerby wrote:
:
:
:
: On 5/19/14 7:56 PM, in article
,
: "nospam" wrote:
:
: In article , PeterN
: wrote:
:
: Should we abolish speed limits on all highways.
:
: that's how it used to be in montana, without mass carnage on the
: highways.
:
: Heard it was the same on some German Autobahns...
:
:
: Unlimited speed was the rule on German Autobahnen but the stretches
with
: that seem to decrease annually. I used to like the signs saying
"Please,
: no faster than 100" (in German of course it was "Bitte, nicht
schneller
: als 100" wasn't it?)

100 isn't all that fast in the metric system.

100 KPH = 62 MPH

My mental arithmetic (and my memory is at fault); it was 140 wsan't it?

140 what? KPH or MPH?
140 KPH = 87 MPH
140 MPH = 225 KPH

On the unrestricted Autobahn there is only a recommended limit of 130
KPH. However, there are no prosecutions for exceeding that
recommendation, unless other negligent driving is cited.

IIRC eating while driving is negligent driving on the Autobahn.

On urban roads the limit is 50 KPH (31 MPH), and rural non-autobahns the
limit is 100 KPH (62 MPH).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...eichen_393.svg




--
PeterN

On 2014-05-23 15:34:05 +0000, PeterN said:

On 5/22/2014 11:37 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-05-23 03:02:55 +0000, James Silverton
said:

On 5/22/2014 10:53 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-05-23 02:41:23 +0000, Robert Coe said:

On Wed, 21 May 2014 17:57:20 -0400, James Silverton
wrote:
: On 5/21/2014 5:29 PM, George Kerby wrote:
:
:
:
: On 5/19/14 7:56 PM, in article
,
: "nospam" wrote:
:
: In article , PeterN
: wrote:
:
: Should we abolish speed limits on all highways.
:
: that's how it used to be in montana, without mass carnage on the
: highways.
:
: Heard it was the same on some German Autobahns...
:
:
: Unlimited speed was the rule on German Autobahnen but the stretches
with
: that seem to decrease annually. I used to like the signs saying
"Please,
: no faster than 100" (in German of course it was "Bitte, nicht
schneller
: als 100" wasn't it?)

100 isn't all that fast in the metric system.

100 KPH = 62 MPH

My mental arithmetic (and my memory is at fault); it was 140 wsan't it?

140 what? KPH or MPH?
140 KPH = 87 MPH
140 MPH = 225 KPH

On the unrestricted Autobahn there is only a recommended limit of 130
KPH. However, there are no prosecutions for exceeding that
recommendation, unless other negligent driving is cited.

IIRC eating while driving is negligent driving on the Autobahn.

It can also be dangerous eating. Try getting the Heimlich maneuver at 120 MPH.

On urban roads the limit is 50 KPH (31 MPH), and rural non-autobahns the
limit is 100 KPH (62 MPH).
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...eichen_393.svg


--
Regards,

Savageduck

"PeterN" wrote in message
On 5/23/2014 9:35 AM, PAS wrote:
"Robert Coe" wrote in message
On Mon, 19 May 2014 20:56:52 -0400, nospam wrote:
: In article PeterN
:
: Should we abolish speed limits on all highways.
:
: that's how it used to be in montana, without mass carnage on the
: highways.

That was Nevada, not Montana. And the reason it worked was because in
those
days you could drive for miles without seeing another car. I forgive you
for
not knowing that, because a) it was probably before you were born and b)
I
doubt you could identify either state on an unannotated map.

Bob

It was Montana. They had no speed limits and the Federal government, of
course, had to stick their nose in it and give them a choice - enact a
speed
limit or no highway funding. So, they did enact a speed limit along with
a
fine of $5.00 and no points.


You cannot have it both ways. The State had a choice, and made its
decision. I give money to the Salvation Army because I believe they do a
lot of good for a lot of people. I also give to other organizations,
because I want to help encourage their activities. If somehow the Tea
Party changed its views, I certainly would help them financially. I have
not taken a survey, but I think there are hundreds of thousands of
moderates who would give the Tea Party money, if they changed their views.

BTW: I do not understand how you can support a political party that
advocates invasion of privacy. Condoning video taping an opposing
candidate's wife in a hospice is nothing short of obscene.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/22/two-more-arrests-in-cochran-photo-probe-in-mississippi/

For the sake of accuracy, the Tea Party is not a political party. It is
loosely organized. As I mentioned in an earlier post, do not judge us all
by the actions of one idiot who had the nerve to do that. It's bigots who
judge a whole group of people by the actions of one or a few. You cannot
lay the charge that Tea Party members condone invading someone's privacy
because one person engaged in it. Does the Democratic Party condone racism
because a racist like Al Sharpton supports the party? You know better than
that.

On 5/23/2014 12:28 PM, PAS wrote:
"PeterN" wrote in message
On 5/23/2014 9:35 AM, PAS wrote:
"Robert Coe" wrote in message
On Mon, 19 May 2014 20:56:52 -0400, nospam wrote:
: In article PeterN
:
: Should we abolish speed limits on all highways.
:
: that's how it used to be in montana, without mass carnage on the
: highways.

That was Nevada, not Montana. And the reason it worked was because in
those
days you could drive for miles without seeing another car. I forgive you
for
not knowing that, because a) it was probably before you were born and b)
I
doubt you could identify either state on an unannotated map.

Bob

It was Montana. They had no speed limits and the Federal government, of
course, had to stick their nose in it and give them a choice - enact a
speed
limit or no highway funding. So, they did enact a speed limit along with
a
fine of $5.00 and no points.


You cannot have it both ways. The State had a choice, and made its
decision. I give money to the Salvation Army because I believe they do a
lot of good for a lot of people. I also give to other organizations,
because I want to help encourage their activities. If somehow the Tea
Party changed its views, I certainly would help them financially. I have
not taken a survey, but I think there are hundreds of thousands of
moderates who would give the Tea Party money, if they changed their views.

BTW: I do not understand how you can support a political party that
advocates invasion of privacy. Condoning video taping an opposing
candidate's wife in a hospice is nothing short of obscene.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/22/two-more-arrests-in-cochran-photo-probe-in-mississippi/

For the sake of accuracy, the Tea Party is not a political party. It is
loosely organized. As I mentioned in an earlier post, do not judge us all
by the actions of one idiot who had the nerve to do that. It's bigots who
judge a whole group of people by the actions of one or a few. You cannot
lay the charge that Tea Party members condone invading someone's privacy
because one person engaged in it. Does the Democratic Party condone racism
because a racist like Al Sharpton supports the party? You know better than
that.

Except the Candidate on whose behalf that idiocy was performed appeared
to condone that action.

I really brought up the Tea Party, because it has held the Republican
Party hostage to its agenda. e.g. sequester. Need we really get into
some of their antics.


--
PeterN

On Thu, 22 May 2014 22:28:01 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Mon, 19 May 2014 09:44:03 -0500, George Kerby
wrote:
:
:
:
: On 5/19/14 8:48 AM, in article , "PAS"
: wrote:
:
:
: "Bowser" wrote in message
: ...
: On Sat, 17 May 2014 23:00:22 -0700 (PDT), RichA
: wrote:
:
: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...t-shakes-up-mi
: ssissippi-republican-primary/
:
: the blogger was a tea party supporter. 'nuff said.
:
: So am I. Don't got the way of a bigot and paint everyone with a broad
: brush. What the blogger did is reprehensible but it is not a reflection on
: the group, just himself.
:
:
: "bowser" is a lapdog for dimwit libtards. He LOVES Uncle SugarDaddy running
: his life, so that response was as expected...

Fine. Think what you like. You will anyway. But unlike you, I've actually met
Bowser. He and I spent several hours on a photo shoot, prowling the city where
I work. And he's not at all the way you describe him.

OK, you win. I'm buying during the next walkabout in Boston, or
whever. :-) I'm due for a trip to the big city.


As I recall, Bowser worked his way through college as a photographer. He was a
regular contributor to the Shoot-In and served a couple of terms running it.
Have we ever seen any of your work?

Bob

I committed the cardinal sin: I disagreed with a staunch conservative.
As soon as that happens, you are automatically a bleeding heart, left
win, commie socialist who wants to feed babies to whales. In reality,
I'm a staunch defender of the second amendment, want English as a
legal national language, am in favor of sealng the borders, and would
vote republican if one, a real one, ever runs again. But hey, let
George have his say. He seems to enjoy it quite a bit. Someday he may
even post a link to some of his pics.

Nah, never happen.

On Fri, 23 May 2014 13:34:54 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 5/23/2014 12:28 PM, PAS wrote:
"PeterN" wrote in message
On 5/23/2014 9:35 AM, PAS wrote:
"Robert Coe" wrote in message
On Mon, 19 May 2014 20:56:52 -0400, nospam wrote:
: In article PeterN
:
: Should we abolish speed limits on all highways.
:
: that's how it used to be in montana, without mass carnage on the
: highways.

That was Nevada, not Montana. And the reason it worked was because in
those
days you could drive for miles without seeing another car. I forgive you
for
not knowing that, because a) it was probably before you were born and b)
I
doubt you could identify either state on an unannotated map.

Bob

It was Montana. They had no speed limits and the Federal government, of
course, had to stick their nose in it and give them a choice - enact a
speed
limit or no highway funding. So, they did enact a speed limit along with
a
fine of $5.00 and no points.


You cannot have it both ways. The State had a choice, and made its
decision. I give money to the Salvation Army because I believe they do a
lot of good for a lot of people. I also give to other organizations,
because I want to help encourage their activities. If somehow the Tea
Party changed its views, I certainly would help them financially. I have
not taken a survey, but I think there are hundreds of thousands of
moderates who would give the Tea Party money, if they changed their views.

BTW: I do not understand how you can support a political party that
advocates invasion of privacy. Condoning video taping an opposing
candidate's wife in a hospice is nothing short of obscene.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/05/22/two-more-arrests-in-cochran-photo-probe-in-mississippi/

For the sake of accuracy, the Tea Party is not a political party. It is
loosely organized. As I mentioned in an earlier post, do not judge us all
by the actions of one idiot who had the nerve to do that. It's bigots who
judge a whole group of people by the actions of one or a few. You cannot
lay the charge that Tea Party members condone invading someone's privacy
because one person engaged in it. Does the Democratic Party condone racism
because a racist like Al Sharpton supports the party? You know better than
that.

Except the Candidate on whose behalf that idiocy was performed appeared
to condone that action.

I really brought up the Tea Party, because it has held the Republican
Party hostage to its agenda. e.g. sequester. Need we really get into
some of their antics.

Not in this news group, if you wouldn't mind.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Fri, 23 May 2014 16:00:29 -0400, Bowser wrote:
: On Thu, 22 May 2014 22:28:01 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:
:
: On Mon, 19 May 2014 09:44:03 -0500, George Kerby
: wrote:
: :
: :
: :
: : On 5/19/14 8:48 AM, in article , "PAS"
: : wrote:
: :
: :
: : "Bowser" wrote in message
: : ...
: : On Sat, 17 May 2014 23:00:22 -0700 (PDT), RichA
: : wrote:
: :
: : http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...t-shakes-up-mi
: : ssissippi-republican-primary/
: :
: : the blogger was a tea party supporter. 'nuff said.
: :
: : So am I. Don't got the way of a bigot and paint everyone with a broad
: : brush. What the blogger did is reprehensible but it is not a reflection on
: : the group, just himself.
: :
: :
: : "bowser" is a lapdog for dimwit libtards. He LOVES Uncle SugarDaddy running
: : his life, so that response was as expected...
:
: Fine. Think what you like. You will anyway. But unlike you, I've actually met
: Bowser. He and I spent several hours on a photo shoot, prowling the city where
: I work. And he's not at all the way you describe him.
:
: OK, you win. I'm buying during the next walkabout in Boston, or
: whever. :-) I'm due for a trip to the big city.

After yet another photo shoot where I had to use my crappy old 50-150 lens
because the City's 70-200 was too long for the job, I'm on the point of
braking down and buying a 5D3. (I already have the 24-105 f/4 walking around
lens it requires.) So if/when I pull the trigger, I'll obviously have to take
it out for a break-in walk. I'll let you know. ;^)

: I committed the cardinal sin: I disagreed with a staunch conservative.
: As soon as that happens, you are automatically a bleeding heart, left
: win, commie socialist who wants to feed babies to whales. In reality,
: I'm a staunch defender of the second amendment, want English as a
: legal national language, am in favor of sealng the borders, and would
: vote republican if one, a real one, ever runs again.

I know how you feel. I seem to recall having been called a communist in this
very newsgroup. I, who worked in the campaign of that notorious pinko Barry
Goldwater and even voted for Richard Nixon before he went off the rails.

: But hey, let George have his say. He seems to enjoy it quite a bit.
: Someday he may even post a link to some of his pics.
:
: Nah, never happen.

Bret Douglas will buy a Nikon first.

Bob

On Fri, 23 May 2014 08:59:54 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:
: On 2014-05-23 15:34:05 +0000, PeterN said:
:
: On 5/22/2014 11:37 PM, Savageduck wrote:
: On 2014-05-23 03:02:55 +0000, James Silverton
: said:
:
: On 5/22/2014 10:53 PM, Savageduck wrote:
: On 2014-05-23 02:41:23 +0000, Robert Coe said:
:
: On Wed, 21 May 2014 17:57:20 -0400, James Silverton
: wrote:
: : On 5/21/2014 5:29 PM, George Kerby wrote:
: :
: :
: :
: : On 5/19/14 7:56 PM, in article
: ,
: : "nospam" wrote:
: :
: : In article , PeterN
: : wrote:
: :
: : Should we abolish speed limits on all highways.
: :
: : that's how it used to be in montana, without mass carnage on the
: : highways.
: :
: : Heard it was the same on some German Autobahns...
: :
: :
: : Unlimited speed was the rule on German Autobahnen but the stretches
: with
: : that seem to decrease annually. I used to like the signs saying
: "Please,
: : no faster than 100" (in German of course it was "Bitte, nicht
: schneller
: : als 100" wasn't it?)
:
: 100 isn't all that fast in the metric system.
:
: 100 KPH = 62 MPH
:
: My mental arithmetic (and my memory is at fault); it was 140 wsan't it?
:
: 140 what? KPH or MPH?
: 140 KPH = 87 MPH
: 140 MPH = 225 KPH
:
: On the unrestricted Autobahn there is only a recommended limit
: of 130 KPH. However, there are no prosecutions for exceeding
: that recommendation, unless other negligent driving is cited.
:
: IIRC eating while driving is negligent driving on the Autobahn.
:
: It can also be dangerous eating. Try getting the Heimlich maneuver
: at 120 MPH.

It's a self-correcting feedback loop. If you pass out and hit something, the
airbag will pop the obstruction out of your goozle.

Bob

"Bowser" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 May 2014 22:28:01 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Mon, 19 May 2014 09:44:03 -0500, George Kerby

wrote:
:
:
:
: On 5/19/14 8:48 AM, in article , "PAS"
: wrote:
:
:
: "Bowser" wrote in message
: ...
: On Sat, 17 May 2014 23:00:22 -0700 (PDT), RichA

: wrote:
:
:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...t-shakes-up-mi
: ssissippi-republican-primary/
:
: the blogger was a tea party supporter. 'nuff said.
:
: So am I. Don't got the way of a bigot and paint everyone with a broad
: brush. What the blogger did is reprehensible but it is not a
reflection on
: the group, just himself.
:
:
: "bowser" is a lapdog for dimwit libtards. He LOVES Uncle SugarDaddy
running
: his life, so that response was as expected...

Fine. Think what you like. You will anyway. But unlike you, I've actually
met
Bowser. He and I spent several hours on a photo shoot, prowling the city
where
I work. And he's not at all the way you describe him.

OK, you win. I'm buying during the next walkabout in Boston, or
whever. :-) I'm due for a trip to the big city.


As I recall, Bowser worked his way through college as a photographer. He
was a
regular contributor to the Shoot-In and served a couple of terms running
it.
Have we ever seen any of your work?

Bob

I committed the cardinal sin: I disagreed with a staunch conservative.
As soon as that happens, you are automatically a bleeding heart, left
win, commie socialist who wants to feed babies to whales. In reality,
I'm a staunch defender of the second amendment, want English as a
legal national language, am in favor of sealng the borders, and would
vote republican if one, a real one, ever runs again. But hey, let
George have his say. He seems to enjoy it quite a bit. Someday he may
even post a link to some of his pics.

Nah, never happen.

I'm a staunch conservative. If you don't disagree with me on something, I
wouldn't consider you normal and the same standard applies to me. If we can
agree on a majority of issues, then we are in the same camp. I'll never
agree 100% with anyone and neither will you and that's perfectly fine. What
I refuse to do is pick my friends based on whether we agree politically.
That would be foolish. Before we were laid off a couple of years ago, the
one co-worker I got along with best is completely on the other side
politically. Were still in touch on a regular basis and get along as well
as we ever did. I tell him he's my favorite Commie. What we have most in
common is that we treat people with the compassion and respect we wish to be
treated with.

On Fri, 23 May 2014 22:36:44 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Fri, 23 May 2014 16:00:29 -0400, Bowser wrote:
: On Thu, 22 May 2014 22:28:01 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:
:
: On Mon, 19 May 2014 09:44:03 -0500, George Kerby
: wrote:
: :
: :
: :
: : On 5/19/14 8:48 AM, in article , "PAS"
: : wrote:
: :
: :
: : "Bowser" wrote in message
: : ...
: : On Sat, 17 May 2014 23:00:22 -0700 (PDT), RichA
: : wrote:
: :
: : http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...t-shakes-up-mi
: : ssissippi-republican-primary/
: :
: : the blogger was a tea party supporter. 'nuff said.
: :
: : So am I. Don't got the way of a bigot and paint everyone with a broad
: : brush. What the blogger did is reprehensible but it is not a reflection on
: : the group, just himself.
: :
: :
: : "bowser" is a lapdog for dimwit libtards. He LOVES Uncle SugarDaddy running
: : his life, so that response was as expected...
:
: Fine. Think what you like. You will anyway. But unlike you, I've actually met
: Bowser. He and I spent several hours on a photo shoot, prowling the city where
: I work. And he's not at all the way you describe him.
:
: OK, you win. I'm buying during the next walkabout in Boston, or
: whever. :-) I'm due for a trip to the big city.

After yet another photo shoot where I had to use my crappy old 50-150 lens
because the City's 70-200 was too long for the job, I'm on the point of
braking down and buying a 5D3. (I already have the 24-105 f/4 walking around
lens it requires.) So if/when I pull the trigger, I'll obviously have to take
it out for a break-in walk. I'll let you know. ;^)

I may be in for a gear churn. I might be doing some sports/action
stuff in the near future, and the m4/3 gear just isn't up for it. Who
knows? Maybe I'll be back at Canon? Or, God forbid, Nikon. :-)


: I committed the cardinal sin: I disagreed with a staunch conservative.
: As soon as that happens, you are automatically a bleeding heart, left
: win, commie socialist who wants to feed babies to whales. In reality,
: I'm a staunch defender of the second amendment, want English as a
: legal national language, am in favor of sealng the borders, and would
: vote republican if one, a real one, ever runs again.

I know how you feel. I seem to recall having been called a communist in this
very newsgroup. I, who worked in the campaign of that notorious pinko Barry
Goldwater and even voted for Richard Nixon before he went off the rails.

: But hey, let George have his say. He seems to enjoy it quite a bit.
: Someday he may even post a link to some of his pics.
:
: Nah, never happen.

Bret Douglas will buy a Nikon first.


True. Bret knows good gear. I think.