General Cooking (rec.food.cooking) For general food and cooking discussion. Foods of all kinds, food procurement, cooking methods and techniques, eating, etc.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #41 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,545
Default Unhappy 4th!

In article >,
Abe > wrote:

> >> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
> >>
> >> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!
> >>

> >My solution? A double tap to the face of every scummy arsehole who wants
> >to invade someone elses home.

>
> Unfortunately, unless you can PROVE that your life was in imminent
> danger, and no, the break-in alone isn't enough to prove that, you're
> looking at a very long time in jail.
>
> Sad but true.


I guess it's time to ask, what is a "double tap"? Obviously it is
force, but is it lethal or non-lethal?
  #42 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,622
Default Unhappy 4th!

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >,
> Abe > wrote:
>
>>>> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>>>>
>>>> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!
>>>>
>>> My solution? A double tap to the face of every scummy arsehole who
>>> wants to invade someone elses home.

>>
>> Unfortunately, unless you can PROVE that your life was in imminent
>> danger, and no, the break-in alone isn't enough to prove that, you're
>> looking at a very long time in jail.
>>
>> Sad but true.

>
> I guess it's time to ask, what is a "double tap"? Obviously it is
> force, but is it lethal or non-lethal?


It's double lethal.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com


  #43 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,962
Default Unhappy 4th!

Dan Abel said...

> In article >,
> Abe > wrote:
>
>> >> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>> >>
>> >> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!
>> >>
>> >My solution? A double tap to the face of every scummy arsehole who
>> >wants to invade someone elses home.

>>
>> Unfortunately, unless you can PROVE that your life was in imminent
>> danger, and no, the break-in alone isn't enough to prove that, you're
>> looking at a very long time in jail.
>>
>> Sad but true.

>
> I guess it's time to ask, what is a "double tap"? Obviously it is
> force, but is it lethal or non-lethal?



A double-tap is a rapid-fire two rounds from a handgun.

As mentioned above, self-defense doesn't include lethal force for defending
"things," rather defending the lives of yourself and those around you from
imminent death, AS A LAST RESORT!!!

Andy
NRA Life
007

  #44 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,055
Default Unhappy 4th!

MOMPEAGRAM wrote:
>
> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>
> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!


The time to commit a crime is when the police
are overloaded with other activities. Holidays
and major natural disasters (earthquakes, forest
fires, etc.) are examples.

The time to commit a crime with a gun is when
there's lots of other explosions to cover up
the sound of gunfire, New Year's Eve and
4th of July in the U.S.
  #45 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,622
Default Unhappy 4th!

Andy wrote:
> Dan Abel said...
>
>> In article >,
>> Abe > wrote:
>>
>>>>> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>>>>>
>>>>> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as
>>>>> ransacked!
>>>>>
>>>> My solution? A double tap to the face of every scummy arsehole who
>>>> wants to invade someone elses home.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, unless you can PROVE that your life was in imminent
>>> danger, and no, the break-in alone isn't enough to prove that,
>>> you're looking at a very long time in jail.
>>>
>>> Sad but true.

>>
>> I guess it's time to ask, what is a "double tap"? Obviously it is
>> force, but is it lethal or non-lethal?

>
>
> A double-tap is a rapid-fire two rounds from a handgun.
>
> As mentioned above, self-defense doesn't include lethal force for
> defending "things," rather defending the lives of yourself and those
> around you from imminent death, AS A LAST RESORT!!!


If someone I don't recognize breaks into my house or business when I'm
present, I'll be in fear of my life. That's all that's required. I don't
have to 'prove' it, I just have to say it.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com




  #46 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 228
Default Unhappy 4th!




"hahabogus" > wrote in message
...
> "MOMPEAGRAM" > wrote in news:f6j17l$r6k$1
> @news.albasani.net:
>
>> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>>
>> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!
>>
>>
>>

>
> So sorry to hear of this....
>


Thanks for the sentiment

--
Helen
in
FERGUS/HARLINGEN


  #47 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 228
Default Unhappy 4th!



"kilikini" > wrote in message
...
> MOMPEAGRAM wrote:
>> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>>
>> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!

>
> Oh, how lovely. :-( I am so sorry to hear this. Have you made a
> list of
> what is missing? It may be difficult to determine, I know. When I was
> broken into, I'd still find things missing up to a few weeks later. I
> just
> kept calling the police to add the items to the report.
>
> Good luck and I hope they catch the guys who did this.
>
> kili
>
>

There is nothing we can do till we go down in November. It's a 5 day
drive so not something we can just do. I know they stole the air
conditioner and the park manager said it's a mess. They broke in to our
shed too and I don't know what's been taken. Unfortunately we didn't
insure the place. We were going to do it this year. So we are stuck.

--
Helen
in
FERGUS/HARLINGEN


  #48 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 228
Default Unhappy 4th!



"Sheldon" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On Jul 5, 11:44?am, "kilikini" > wrote:
>> MOMPEAGRAM wrote:
>> > Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!

>>
>> > Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!

>>
>> Oh, how lovely. :-( I am so sorry to hear this. Have you made a
>> list of
>> what is missing? It may be difficult to determine, I know. When I was
>> broken into, I'd still find things missing up to a few weeks later. I
>> just
>> kept calling the police to add the items to the report.
>>
>> Good luck and I hope they catch the guys who did this.

>
> Geeze, that sucks.
>
> Chances are they won't catch the thieves, not unless there was
> anything valuable and out of the ordinary taken, something that would
> send up a red flag when it was attempted to be disposed of. Everyone
> should take lots of pictures of everything they own, all valuables,
> room by room, wall by wall, open each closet, each dresser drawer,
> every cabinet... basement, attic, garage, everything outdoors, even
> inside your car trunk. Then upload all your pics to a photo website,
> there are plenty of free ones. And take tons of pictures, with
> digicams it's easy, it's free.
>
> I hope they catch the thief, but don't hold your breath... your stuff
> is probably all gone by now, traded for drugs.
>
> Sheldon
>

That's what we do but the dumbest was not listening to my inner voice to
insure before we left. And I know it was dumb!

--
Helen
in
FERGUS/HARLINGEN


  #49 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 228
Default Unhappy 4th!



"Ophelia" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Sheldon" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>> On Jul 5, 12:25?pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
>>> MOMPEAGRAM wrote:
>>>
>>> > Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>>>
>>> > Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!

>
> Oh Helen I have only just seen this! I am so sorry
>

Thanks Ophelia. I won't know how sorry I am till we go down in NOvember.
We just can't drop everything and drive 10 days for this.

--
Helen
in
FERGUS/HARLINGEN


  #50 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,962
Default Unhappy 4th!

Dave Bugg said...

> Andy wrote:
>> Dan Abel said...
>>
>>> In article >,
>>> Abe > wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as
>>>>>> ransacked!
>>>>>>
>>>>> My solution? A double tap to the face of every scummy arsehole who
>>>>> wants to invade someone elses home.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, unless you can PROVE that your life was in imminent
>>>> danger, and no, the break-in alone isn't enough to prove that,
>>>> you're looking at a very long time in jail.
>>>>
>>>> Sad but true.
>>>
>>> I guess it's time to ask, what is a "double tap"? Obviously it is
>>> force, but is it lethal or non-lethal?

>>
>>
>> A double-tap is a rapid-fire two rounds from a handgun.
>>
>> As mentioned above, self-defense doesn't include lethal force for
>> defending "things," rather defending the lives of yourself and those
>> around you from imminent death, AS A LAST RESORT!!!

>
> If someone I don't recognize breaks into my house or business when I'm
> present, I'll be in fear of my life. That's all that's required. I don't
> have to 'prove' it, I just have to say it.



NOT GOOD ENOUGH.

How fast can you evaluate a threat??? How do you REACT to a threat?
"STOP!!!"? In your home or your business? I'd say you're "I just have to
say it" would qualify you for prison time.

Suppose it was an Alzheimers person thinking he's breaking into his OWN
home. Would you be right in using lethal force? NOPE. But you'd shoot first
and find out later he was your next door neighbor.

Ya BUM!!!

Andy




  #52 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,545
Default Unhappy 4th!

In article >, Andy <q> wrote:


> Caller ID is a the familiar third service (incoming # ID) that's only
> useful purpose these days is for Caller Photo ID at a glance, seen on
> advanced cell phones. If it's a pay-for service, it's hardly worth the
> money.



We pay for ours on the landline, and it's well worth it. I guess YMMV.
  #53 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,852
Default Unhappy 4th!

In article >,
"MOMPEAGRAM" > wrote:

> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>
> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!


I'm sorry. :-(
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson
  #54 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,852
Default Unhappy 4th!

In article >,
Abe > wrote:

> >> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
> >>
> >> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!
> >>

> >My solution? A double tap to the face of every scummy arsehole who wants
> >to invade someone elses home.

>
> Unfortunately, unless you can PROVE that your life was in imminent
> danger, and no, the break-in alone isn't enough to prove that, you're
> looking at a very long time in jail.
>
> Sad but true.


Not in Texas...
You may want to check the Florida laws.
Many gun laws are modeled on some originally made in Florida.

My google search was "Texas Deadly Force laws".

SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY

9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person in
lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is
justified in using force against another when and to the degree the
actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to
prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful
interference with the property.
(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible,
movable property by another is justified in using force against the
other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force
is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the
property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit
after the dispossession and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no
claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or
(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using
force, threat, or fraud against the actor.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.


9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is
justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the
other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the
deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of
arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the
nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing
immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated
robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the
property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:

(A) the land or property cannot be protected or
recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to
protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or
another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.


9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON'S PROPERTY. A person
is justified in using force or deadly force against another to
protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if,
under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the
actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force
or deadly force to protect his own land or property and:
(1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful
interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or
criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or
(2) the actor reasonably believes that:

(A) the third person has requested his protection
of the land or property;
(B) he has a legal duty to protect the third
person's land or property; or
(C) the third person whose land or property he
uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor's spouse, parent,
or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor's care.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, 1.01, eff. Sept. 1,
1994.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson
  #55 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,622
Default Unhappy 4th!

Andy wrote:
> Dave Bugg said...
>
>> Andy wrote:
>>> Dan Abel said...
>>>
>>>> In article >,
>>>> Abe > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as
>>>>>>> ransacked!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> My solution? A double tap to the face of every scummy arsehole
>>>>>> who wants to invade someone elses home.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, unless you can PROVE that your life was in imminent
>>>>> danger, and no, the break-in alone isn't enough to prove that,
>>>>> you're looking at a very long time in jail.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sad but true.
>>>>
>>>> I guess it's time to ask, what is a "double tap"? Obviously it is
>>>> force, but is it lethal or non-lethal?
>>>
>>>
>>> A double-tap is a rapid-fire two rounds from a handgun.
>>>
>>> As mentioned above, self-defense doesn't include lethal force for
>>> defending "things," rather defending the lives of yourself and those
>>> around you from imminent death, AS A LAST RESORT!!!

>>
>> If someone I don't recognize breaks into my house or business when
>> I'm present, I'll be in fear of my life. That's all that's required.
>> I don't have to 'prove' it, I just have to say it.

>
>
> NOT GOOD ENOUGH.
>
> How fast can you evaluate a threat???


Fairly quickly.

How do you REACT to a threat?

With the force necessary to neutralize it.

> "STOP!!!"? In your home or your business? I'd say you're "I just have
> to say it" would qualify you for prison time.


Nope.

Now, please, do you best to concoct a ridiculous scenario to try and make a
point.

> Suppose it was an Alzheimers person thinking he's breaking into his
> OWN home.


OK. And let's also suppose that it's a ne'er-do-well punk.

> Would you be right in using lethal force? NOPE.


For the punk or the alzheimers patient? Are you suggesting that it's ok to
use other levels of force against an alzheimers patient so long as it's NOT
lethal force? Well, shame on you!!!!! As for myself, I'd try to calm the
alheimers patient down and call the police to help him out.

I'm sorry to hear that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between a
ne'er-do-well punk or when in the presence of a confused senior citizen. I'm
sure that spending time visiting at a long-term care facility and at your
local jail will help you solve that problem. In the meantime, I suggest that
you refuse to take action when faced with the scenario that you painted. You
don't want to folks to know that you would beat up a confused old man or
woman.

> But you'd
> shoot first and find out later he was your next door neighbor.


You don't know your next door neighbors? Man, Andy, you need to get out and
get to know the folks in your neighborhood.

--
Dave
www.davebbq.com




  #56 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,640
Default Unhappy 4th!

Sheldon wrote:
>
>
> > my sons school. They knew we were going to be away for the March break. We
> > used to get a lot of telephone calls with hang-ups as soon as we answered.
> > We got a new and unlisted number after that, but now that we have call
> > display we are listed again.

>
> What's "call display" and what does that have to do with having an
> unpublished number?



"Call display" is "caller ID". It shows you the number that is calling your
phone. It used to be quite common for people casing a house for a burglary
to call to see if anyone is home. Call display/caller ID was also a great
way to deter people from making harassing phone calls. Having a number
unlisted decreases the chances of someone casing your house to call to
check if you are home. Once I got the call display I didn't feel the need
to maintain an unlisted number.
  #57 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,551
Default Unhappy 4th!

On Jul 5, 2:36?pm, "MOMPEAGRAM" > wrote:
> "Sheldon" > wrote in message
>
> ups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Jul 5, 11:44?am, "kilikini" > wrote:
> >> MOMPEAGRAM wrote:
> >> > Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!

>
> >> > Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!

>
> >> Oh, how lovely. :-( I am so sorry to hear this. Have you made a
> >> list of
> >> what is missing? It may be difficult to determine, I know. When I was
> >> broken into, I'd still find things missing up to a few weeks later. I
> >> just
> >> kept calling the police to add the items to the report.

>
> >> Good luck and I hope they catch the guys who did this.

>
> > Geeze, that sucks.

>
> > Chances are they won't catch the thieves, not unless there was
> > anything valuable and out of the ordinary taken, something that would
> > send up a red flag when it was attempted to be disposed of. Everyone
> > should take lots of pictures of everything they own, all valuables,
> > room by room, wall by wall, open each closet, each dresser drawer,
> > every cabinet... basement, attic, garage, everything outdoors, even
> > inside your car trunk. Then upload all your pics to a photo website,
> > there are plenty of free ones. And take tons of pictures, with
> > digicams it's easy, it's free.

>
> > I hope they catch the thief, but don't hold your breath... your stuff
> > is probably all gone by now, traded for drugs.

>
> > Sheldon

>
> That's what we do but the dumbest was not listening to my inner voice to
> insure before we left. And I know it was dumb!


What do you mean by "insure before we left"? So now I'm assuming you
rent. Everyone who rents needs renter's insurance, from day one.
Renter's insurance is very inexpensive (less than $1/day). It's very
good that you didn't take out a policy just before you left on your
trip. Had you done that you very likely would have been arrested on
suspician of commiting or orchestrating that burglary.

Btw, the vast majority of rental burglaries are inside jobs... odds
are 999 to 1 that you or someone in your household knows the
burglar(s). The fact that the burglary just happened to occur during
a planned trip increases those odds a thousand fold.

Right now (today!) call your insurance company and take out a renter's
policy... your auto ins company can handle it. No one should ever
advertise that they are going away (especially not on the net), tell
your friends after you return.

Sheldon

  #58 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,551
Default Unhappy 4th!

On Jul 5, 12:50?pm, hahabogus > wrote:
> Sheldon > wrote roups.com:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 5, 12:25?pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
> >> MOMPEAGRAM wrote:

>
> >> > Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!

>
> >> > Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!

>
> >> That is unfortunate. It leaves you feeling violated doesn't it. My
> >> house was broken into about 15 years ago. We were away on a skiing
> >> vacation at the time. The police caught the burglars. It was a bunch
> >> of teenagers from my sons school. They knew we were going to be away
> >> for the March break. We used to get a lot of telephone calls with
> >> hang-ups as soon as we answered. We got a new and unlisted number
> >> after that, but now that we have call display we are listed again.

>
> > What's "call display" and what does that have to do with having an
> > unpublished number?

>
> > Sheldon

>
> You can have call display and have your number blocked from showing on
> other's phones...well you can up here. So sayth the telephone Company
> employeee. There's the feature where you push a series of numbers and
> block your number from showing on a call by call bases or you can have
> total number blocking at various levels of serverity on all calls you
> make. That doesn't stop you from seeing who is calling you...excepting
> others can do the same. You can also get label service where a number not
> necessarily yours is displayed (businesses do it all the time). When they
> want you to call back at a 800 number or whatever.


That still doesn't explain the part about the unpublished number... I
don't see how activationg call display, or not, has any bearing on the
unpublished number. My number is unpublished. I also have what you
call "call display" (here it's called "anonymous caller service"). I
can turn it on or off by pressing a few keys. When I turn it on all
callers must turn off their anonymous caller service so that I can
view who's calling on my caller ID, otherwise their call will not be
completed. Friendly callers don't mind identifying themselves. But
the anonymous caller service sure cuts down on telemarketers, and
especially those awful recorded calls. But this is a totally separate
service from my unpublished number service... having one has no
bearing on having the other.

Sheldon

  #59 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 77
Default Unhappy 4th!

On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 08:50:15 -0700, Abe > wrote:

>>> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>>>
>>> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!
>>>

>>My solution? A double tap to the face of every scummy arsehole who wants
>>to invade someone elses home.

>
>Unfortunately, unless you can PROVE that your life was in imminent
>danger, and no, the break-in alone isn't enough to prove that, you're
>looking at a very long time in jail.
>
>Sad but true.





I like the old days better where an individual could protect his
property as well as his life. A lot of states are getting away from
the "Duty to retreat" aspect of self defense so its a step in the
right direction.
  #60 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,551
Default Unhappy 4th!

On Jul 5, 4:32?pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
>
> > > my sons school. They knew we were going to be away for the March break. We
> > > used to get a lot of telephone calls with hang-ups as soon as we answered.
> > > We got a new and unlisted number after that, but now that we have call
> > > display we are listed again.

>
> > What's "call display" and what does that have to do with having an
> > unpublished number?

>
> "Call display" is "caller ID". It shows you the number that is calling your
> phone. It used to be quite common for people casing a house for a burglary
> to call to see if anyone is home. Call display/caller ID was also a great
> way to deter people from making harassing phone calls. Having a number
> unlisted decreases the chances of someone casing your house to call to
> check if you are home. Once I got the call display I didn't feel the need
> to maintain an unlisted number.


But then your name, address, and phone number is published for
everyone to see. I don't see the point in having call display if your
info is published... that's a false sense of security.



  #61 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,984
Default Unhappy 4th!

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >, Andy <q> wrote:
>
>
>> Caller ID is a the familiar third service (incoming # ID) that's only
>> useful purpose these days is for Caller Photo ID at a glance, seen on
>> advanced cell phones. If it's a pay-for service, it's hardly worth the
>> money.

>
>
> We pay for ours on the landline, and it's well worth it. I guess YMMV.


I'm too cheap to pay for that service, and in fact don't believe in
paying more for an unlisted number. I solve most of my phone problems by
having the phone listed in my dog's name. Works for us.
  #62 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Unhappy 4th!

On Thu, 5 Jul 2007 11:02:44 -0400, "MOMPEAGRAM"
> wrote:

>Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>
>Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!


That sounds like a patriotic thing to do on the 4th of July,
especially in the state where our president comes from. Well, come to
think of it, Bush has been robbing and ransacking everyone in the USA
ever since he became president. Strange coincidence !!!!

Ed N
  #64 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,325
Default Unhappy 4th!

Abe > wrote in
:

>>>> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>>>>
>>>> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!
>>>>
>>>My solution? A double tap to the face of every scummy arsehole who
>>>wants to invade someone elses home.

>>


> Actually, I revise my statement. It really varies quite a bit from
> state to state. I should have done a little more reading before I
> posted. For example, here are the relevant sections of Illinois law:
>
> ARTICLE 7. JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE; EXONERATION
>
> (720 ILCS 5/7-1) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-1)
> Sec. 7-1. Use of force in defense of person.
> (a) However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended
> or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably
> believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or
> great bodily harm to himself or another, or the commission of a
> forcible felony.
>
> (720 ILCS 5/7-2) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-2)
> Sec. 7-2. Use of force in defense of dwelling.
> (a) However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended
> or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if:
> (1) The entry is made or attempted in a violent,
> riotous, or tumultuous manner, and he reasonably believes that such
> force is necessary to prevent an assault upon, or offer of personal
> violence to, him or another then in the dwelling, or
> (2) He reasonably believes that such force is
> necessary to prevent the commission of a felony in the dwelling.
>
> (720 ILCS 5/7-3) (from Ch. 38, par. 7-3)
> Sec. 7-3. Use of force in defense of other property.
> (a) However, he is justified in the use of force which is intended
> or likely to cause death or great bodily harm only if he reasonably
> believes that such force is necessary to prevent the commission of a
> forcible felony.
>



Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!! Commonsense prevails :-)



--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

"People sleep safely in their beds because rough men stand ready in
the night to do violence to those who would do them harm"
-- George Orwell
  #65 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,325
Default Unhappy 4th!

Dan Abel > wrote in
:

> In article >,
> Abe > wrote:
>
>> >> Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!
>> >>
>> >> Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as
>> >> ransacked!
>> >>
>> >My solution? A double tap to the face of every scummy arsehole who
>> >wants to invade someone elses home.

>>
>> Unfortunately, unless you can PROVE that your life was in imminent
>> danger, and no, the break-in alone isn't enough to prove that, you're
>> looking at a very long time in jail.
>>
>> Sad but true.

>
> I guess it's time to ask, what is a "double tap"? Obviously it is
> force, but is it lethal or non-lethal?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_tap


Once you learn it, it becomes a natural thing to do :-)




--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

"People sleep safely in their beds because rough men stand ready in
the night to do violence to those who would do them harm"
-- George Orwell


  #66 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,325
Default Unhappy 4th!

Andy <q> wrote in :


>>
>> I guess it's time to ask, what is a "double tap"? Obviously it is
>> force, but is it lethal or non-lethal?

>
>
> A double-tap is a rapid-fire two rounds from a handgun.
>
> As mentioned above, self-defense doesn't include lethal force for
> defending "things," rather defending the lives of yourself and those
> around you from imminent death, AS A LAST RESORT!!!
>



And how will you know if/or when lives around you are in imminet danger?
Wait till the home-invader actually does harm to someone??

You might wait. I won't hesitate.


--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

"People sleep safely in their beds because rough men stand ready in
the night to do violence to those who would do them harm"
-- George Orwell
  #67 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,219
Default Unhappy 4th!

On Jul 5, 1:17 pm, Mark Thorson > wrote:
> MOMPEAGRAM wrote:
>
> > Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!

>
> > Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!

>
> The time to commit a crime is when the police
> are overloaded with other activities. Holidays
> and major natural disasters (earthquakes, forest
> fires, etc.) are examples.
>
> The time to commit a crime with a gun is when
> there's lots of other explosions to cover up
> the sound of gunfire, New Year's Eve and
> 4th of July in the U.S.


Here in St. Louis, we have a real problem with folks in low income
neighborhoods firing guns up into the air to celebrate the New Year.
Every year for several days before New Years Eve they run commercials
discouraging it. The bullets don't just stay up. They eventually
come down.

--Bryan

  #68 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,730
Default Unhappy 4th!

Bobo Bonobo® > wrote:
>Here in St. Louis, we have a real problem with folks in low income
>neighborhoods firing guns up into the air to celebrate the New Year.
>Every year for several days before New Years Eve they run commercials
>discouraging it. The bullets don't just stay up. They eventually
>come down.


Arizona now has "Shannon's Law" making that a crime.

It's named after one of the victims, who was killed just
standing in her backyard.

--Blair
  #69 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,640
Default Unhappy 4th!

Sheldon wrote:
> That still doesn't explain the part about the unpublished number... I
> don't see how activationg call display, or not, has any bearing on the
> unpublished number.



The reason for the unpublished number was so that anyone wanting to keep
calling my number to see if I was home or not would not know the number.
  #70 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,640
Default Unhappy 4th!

Sheldon wrote:
>
>
> But then your name, address, and phone number is published for
> everyone to see. I don't see the point in having call display if your
> info is published... that's a false sense of security.


Caller ID has ended a lot of nuisance calling. People who used to make
crank phone calls soon learned they were no longer anonymous.


  #71 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,215
Default Unhappy 4th!


"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> Sheldon wrote:
>> That still doesn't explain the part about the unpublished number... I
>> don't see how activationg call display, or not, has any bearing on the
>> unpublished number.

>
>
> The reason for the unpublished number was so that anyone wanting to keep
> calling my number to see if I was home or not would not know the number.


It also limits the suspects, as well, because only those you gave the number
to would know where to call you. With caller ID, most teens who think they
are savvy enough to get away with casing you, usually forget to block their
own numbers, so you have a record (at least on my phone) of calls received
and from whom.

FBS had a stalker and that's how we knew who it was, an old girlfriend, all
of 17 at the time, who was harassing him since the breakup. Like, yeah,
I'll make your life miserable until we get back together..........one little
visit from the police and lo and behold, no more calls in the middle of the
night.
-g


  #72 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,551
Default Unhappy 4th!

Dave Smith wrote:
> Sheldon wrote:
>
> > But then your name, address, and phone number is published for
> > everyone to see. I don't see the point in having call display if your
> > info is published... that's a false sense of security.

>
> Caller ID has ended a lot of nuisance calling. People who used to make
> crank phone calls soon learned they were no longer anonymous.


Crank calls aren't nearly so serious as being published permitting the
crooks and nutcases from knowing where you live... and today most
crank calls are computer generated anyway (just a roulette wheel),
there is no real malice or intent directed at a particular individual,
telemarketers and crank callers are equal opportunity pests. I really
don't see any security connection between caller ID and being
unpublished; apples and oranges. Having to make a choice I'd always
choose unpublished, I can hang up on a crank call but it's not so easy
to prevent someone who knows how to physically find you from menacing
you in a real way. Telemarketers/cranks are not seeking to burglarize
your house. I've always maintained an unpublished number, since long
before caller ID was a dream. Anyone who gives up their unpublished
status because they think caller ID is a substitute is a fool.

Sheldon

  #73 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,852
Default Unhappy 4th!

In article >,
PeterLucas > wrote:

> > I guess it's time to ask, what is a "double tap"? Obviously it is
> > force, but is it lethal or non-lethal?

>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_tap
>
>
> Once you learn it, it becomes a natural thing to do :-)
>
>
>
>
> --
> Peter Lucas


Triple tap is even better...

2 to center of mass and one to the head in case they are wearing body
armor. I've seen more than one cop practicing those at the pistol range.

It's almost scary.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson
  #74 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,852
Default Unhappy 4th!

In article . com>,
Bobo Bonobo(R) > wrote:

> On Jul 5, 1:17 pm, Mark Thorson > wrote:
> > MOMPEAGRAM wrote:
> >
> > > Well it wasn't a happy 4th for us!

> >
> > > Our place in Texas was broken into and robbed as well as ransacked!

> >
> > The time to commit a crime is when the police
> > are overloaded with other activities. Holidays
> > and major natural disasters (earthquakes, forest
> > fires, etc.) are examples.
> >
> > The time to commit a crime with a gun is when
> > there's lots of other explosions to cover up
> > the sound of gunfire, New Year's Eve and
> > 4th of July in the U.S.

>
> Here in St. Louis, we have a real problem with folks in low income
> neighborhoods firing guns up into the air to celebrate the New Year.
> Every year for several days before New Years Eve they run commercials
> discouraging it. The bullets don't just stay up. They eventually
> come down.
>
> --Bryan


They usually come down within seconds, but it's still a very bad
practice. :-P I may consider it with blanks but never with live rounds.

It's idiots like that that give responsible gun owners a bad rap.
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson
  #75 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,883
Default Unhappy 4th!

Omelet wrote:
> Triple tap is even better...
>
> 2 to center of mass and one to the head in case they are wearing body
> armor. I've seen more than one cop practicing those at the pistol
> range.
>
> It's almost scary.


Hmm, David has just explained that.. in detail!!

I am about to make dinner too




  #76 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,876
Default Unhappy 4th!

On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 07:51:51 -0700, Sheldon > wrote:

>
>Crank calls aren't nearly so serious as being published permitting the
>crooks and nutcases from knowing where you live... and today most
>crank calls are computer generated anyway (just a roulette wheel),
>there is no real malice or intent directed at a particular individual,
>telemarketers and crank callers are equal opportunity pests. I really
>don't see any security connection between caller ID and being
>unpublished; apples and oranges. Having to make a choice I'd always
>choose unpublished, I can hang up on a crank call but it's not so easy
>to prevent someone who knows how to physically find you from menacing
>you in a real way. Telemarketers/cranks are not seeking to burglarize
>your house. I've always maintained an unpublished number, since long
>before caller ID was a dream. Anyone who gives up their unpublished
>status because they think caller ID is a substitute is a fool.


Oh, good grief! Does the word paranoia ring a bell?
--

History is a vast early warning system
Norman Cousins
  #77 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,852
Default Unhappy 4th!

In article >,
"Ophelia" > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
> > Triple tap is even better...
> >
> > 2 to center of mass and one to the head in case they are wearing body
> > armor. I've seen more than one cop practicing those at the pistol
> > range.
> >
> > It's almost scary.

>
> Hmm, David has just explained that.. in detail!!
>
> I am about to make dinner too


Relax. :-)

You are not a criminal so you will never have to worry about it!
--
Peace, Om

Remove _ to validate e-mails.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a Son of a bitch" -- Jack Nicholson
  #78 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,883
Default Unhappy 4th!

Omelet wrote:
> In article >,
> "Ophelia" > wrote:
>
>> Omelet wrote:
>>> Triple tap is even better...
>>>
>>> 2 to center of mass and one to the head in case they are wearing
>>> body armor. I've seen more than one cop practicing those at the
>>> pistol range.
>>>
>>> It's almost scary.

>>
>> Hmm, David has just explained that.. in detail!!
>>
>> I am about to make dinner too

>
> Relax. :-)
>
> You are not a criminal so you will never have to worry about it!


<G>


  #79 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,799
Default Unhappy 4th!


"Virginia Tadrzynski" > wrote in message
>
> FBS had a stalker and that's how we knew who it was, an old girlfriend,
> all of 17 at the time, who was harassing him since the breakup. Like,
> yeah, I'll make your life miserable until we get back
> together..........one little visit from the police and lo and behold, no
> more calls in the middle of the night.
> -g


Similar situation some years ago when we moved from Philly to CT. Caller ID
was not invented yet and we got lots of hang up calls. They stopped
abruptly when the kids parents got the phone bill listing all those long
distance calls.


  #80 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,209
Default Reheating ham


"Steve Wertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 19:11:16 -0700, Kent wrote:
>
>> I looked for instructions like that on their site and didn't find them.
>> The
>> above URL does give instructions about cooking a raw ham. It isn't at all
>> clear on their product list "what cooked and is what isn't". The bottom
>> line
>> is that you should cook raw ham to an internal temp. of about 155-160F.
>> You
>> really can't do that with a 250F oven unless you're willing to sit about
>> a
>> very long time. Sorry for the confusion.

>
> Plus this term into Google: "Focus on Ham".
>
> Then after you read it, come back and revise or clarify
> everything you've said.
>
> -sw
>
>

From the site:

"TIMETABLE FOR COOKING HAM

NOTE: Set oven temperature to 325 °F. Both cook-before-eating cured and
fresh hams should be cooked to 160 °F. Reheat cooked hams packaged in
USDA-inspected plants to 140 °F and all others to 165 °F."

One doesn't cook an uncooked ham at 250F, and one does cook it to 155-160F.

Kent





Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Food for Reheating Later gloria.p General Cooking 1 21-04-2010 05:14 AM
Reheating After Freezing hutchndi Sourdough 10 01-02-2006 09:19 PM
reheating ribs bk Barbecue 7 06-09-2005 10:07 PM
Reheating mash! Squet34785 General Cooking 3 25-07-2005 05:39 AM
reheating tri-tip [email protected] Barbecue 2 09-06-2005 11:49 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:28 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"