text:
Those of you who have followed my work for a while know that I decorate most of my cookies with what I call Meringue Powder Buttercream. I occasionally dabble in other mediums, but I always go back to MPB.
It all started about 13 years ago. I was a full-time cake decorator at the time, and frequently visited a message board full of cake decorators (sort of like Cake Central, before there was Cake Central). Although I had done tons of cookies in the past, I wasn't thinking "cookies" at the time, because I was so eyeball-deep in wedding cakes. There was a trend at the time to put roses and other piped flowers on the sides of cakes, and I had been getting requests for these, but people didn't want royal icing flowers because they were too crunchy. I went to the cake decorator's message board to see if there was any way to make buttercream flowers stay on the sides of cakes. A lady sent me a recipe for "Quick Crusting Buttercream", that she said would work. So I started using it to make roses, pansies, and other flowers.
Here's a cake from back in the day:
I couldn't find a photo of one with the flowers on the sides of the cake, but you can picture it, right?
Pretty soon afterward, I got a request for some Christmas cookies (from my mom!). I had used Royal Icing a lot, but didn't like that it dried chalky and matte. I wondered if this new "Quick-Crusting Buttercream" recipe would dry enough to use on cookies, and be able to bag them, pack them up, and ship them to my mom. I altered it a little so it wasn't so stiff, and gave it a whirl. It worked! And I've been using it ever since. Here are some cookies done with MPB:
I could post 200 or more pictures here, but you get the idea.
I love how it has a consistent sheen. It works well, comes out of the tips smooth and lovely, and it doesn't get those pesky craters that come with other icings. But it has a problem. I get a lot of feedback from people who say it never dries enough to stack or bag. I'm pretty sure it must be a climate thing, but I haven't figured out a fool-proof fix for it. So I've played around with other icings so that I could have something else to recommend when people have trouble with MPB.
Like Corn Syrup Glaze. Cookie Crazie Pam uses it for all of her cookies, and they're amazing! So I've played around with it.
It's a great icing. I enjoy playing with it. I use it occasionally for different cookie projects. But I still end up going back to MPB. Maybe old habits die hard. Maybe I'm just used to working with it.
I've also tried fondant and candy clay.
Wow, those are nice pictures. I can tell Mike took them! 😀 Candy Clay and fondant are also really fun for certain projects. But I STILL always come back to MPB.
The one icing I have tried not to touch with a 10-foot pole was royal icing. It always dried so ugly for me. I used it last December for some winter cookies.
It's hard to tell from the picture, but it's not just matte. It's chalky. That is what RI has always been for me, and why I haven't liked it.
Until now.
I went to Cookie Camp back in September, and the recipe they used there was royal icing. And guess what? It dried shiny! I mean, not super-duper shiny, but shiny enough. Definitely not matte or chalky.
See? There's definitely a bit of shine on those. They used a version of Antonia74 royal icing. I don't know the original source of this recipe, but it's been floating around the web for a long time. Do a quick google search and see how many references come up when you put in Antonia74. There are all kinds of versions and variations of it.
So anyway, I came home and decided to give Royal Icing another chance. I made these pumpkins with it:
Look! Shiny! In fact, they were so shiny that I actually had kind of a tough time getting a good shot of them. Go figure!
So I don't know if I'm a complete convert yet. I still love my MPB. BUT– if you've tried the MPB and had trouble with it, give Royal Icing or Corn Syrup Glaze or Candy Clay a shot. Here are all four recipes for you. Try them all and see what fits with your style.
Royal Icing
(a version of Antonia74's recipe)
3/4 cup warm water
5 T meringue powder
1 teaspoon cream of tartar
2.25 lbs. powdered icing sugar
Put water, meringue powder, and cream of tartar into a glass or metal mixing bowl. Whisk until foamy. Gradually add powdered sugar and mix with paddle attachment until fluffy, about 2-3 minutes. Stir in any flavorings you desire. (I use 1 1/2 tsp. clear vanilla, 1/2 tsp. clear butter, and 1/4 tsp. almond emulsion)
- 1/3 cup water
- 3 to 4 T. meringue powder (more for humid climates)
- ½ cup Crisco shortening (can cut this down in humid climates)
- 4 ½ cups powdered sugar (1 lb. 3 oz. If you have a scale)
- 1 tsp. vanilla extract (use clear vanilla if you want a pure white icing)
- ¼ tsp. almond extract
- 2 lb powdered sugar
- ½ C plus 2 T milk (10 T)
- ½ C plus 2 T corn syrup (10 T)
- 1 T. flavoring, any combination (I like 2 tsp. clear vanilla, ½ tsp. Almond Emulsion, and ½ tsp. clear butter flavoring, but you can get creative and try different things.)
- 10 oz chocolate (white, milk, dark, or colored candy melts)
- 1/3 cup light corn syrup (like Karo, but any brand works)


text:
Translation: 2ch attends FanimeconPosted on June 3rd, 2011 at 3:44 am by astrange
I also went to Fanime, so I can explain some of this in more detail. Also take a look at my photos, they're much better than last time!
I've left "doujin" untranslated for that 2ch feel, but of course they mean the Artists' Alley. You are also missing out on some jokes because I can't think of a translation for アメリカã®ãŠã¾ãˆã'‰.
Source: the News4VIP thread I went to an American Comic Market via hamster sokuhou
1: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:00:42.69 ID:9cXwo77C0
I don't know if you could call it a Comic Market, more like an anime festival, but anyway there were doujin booths and industry booths.
3: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:02:26.65 ID:N8peOve80
Foreigners cosplay pretty openly, huh.
At Comic Market, you're required to arrive in normal clothes and change on site, to avoid scaring normal people on the way there.
7: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:03:07.53 ID:9cXwo77C0
8: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:03:32.42 ID:S9I+C3lZ0
It's so similar I'd believe you if you told me it was Japan.
22: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:07:46.01 ID:n/GQz7rH0
When I saw the pizza, I knew it was America.
27: Ninpochou [Lv=2,xxxPT]1 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:10:52.33 ID:0byQt2KO0
I'd like to know what's different about the doujinshi over there.
35: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:14:11.70 ID:9cXwo77C0
People mainly sell posters.
I barely saw any doujin books, but somehow I got a Japanese Touhou doujin. There were some from Taiwan.
I don't know what the Japanese book was. There was a dealer called Fairy Doujin selling doujin artbooks in Chinese that were good but very expensive. Hen Da Ne did not come to Fanime, so there was no Comiket content to be found.
32: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:13:01.97 ID:9cXwo77C0
There's a lot of guys like Saizensen-kun in America too.
Saizensen-kun is the name of a famous sweaty photographer who was the subject of an old Internet meme.
47: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:17:22.65 ID:9cXwo77C0
I must have missed him.
57: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:19:13.38 ID:S9I+C3lZ0
The familiar sight of backpacks…
Wait, isn't this just Japan!?
55: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:18:38.78 ID:viUDrtXA0
I laughed at the Vocaloid cosplay.
What are the popular manga and anime in America right now? I was under the impression they'd stopped showing Naruto and Dragonball.
58: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:19:44.69 ID:9cXwo77C0
It's the same as you guys. They all like Madoka Magica and stuff.
62: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:20:41.95 ID:9cXwo77C0
By the way, all the Asians I saw seemed to be Chinese.
78: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:24:47.31 ID:mJZBDakd0
Does doujin art over there use American comics style?
84: Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:28:46.40 ID:9cXwo77C0
There was one with American-style Touhou.
But they weren't selling doujin books, but posters for $15. And pins.
He means Miluda and Rabid Potato's booth. The pins are cool, but they were selling a book! You should go see them at AX!
123 Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:43:20.68 ID:G+wiPBwPP
This is the best part of your photo.
133 Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:48:55.84 ID:C+HWyze50
<Do you have a job?>
130 Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 13:47:16.62 ID:Hh8lsAH60
Has fujoshi culture made it over there?
Does Amazon list BL as a category over there?
The manga category on amazon.jp is actually named "Manga / Anime / BL".
185 Anonymous 2011/05/31(ç«) 14:23:31.92 ID:9cXwo77C0
These are all the doujin I found…
The one on top is by kata. I think the rest are Chinese. I'm impressed he found that many.
Suddenly got bored translating. The highlights:
– Americans only do posters for art.
– Americans are really good at making costumes.
– American cameras are silent so it's easier to take stealth photos.
– You can take pictures anywhere in America, but it's forbidden in most parts of Japanese events.
As for myself I've never bought an artist print, because I have no idea what to do with it… they should really do more books. That and many artists just aren't that good.
As for Fanime, it was much better than Acen, but almost as programming-free. They had so many late panel changes that the schedule wasn't printed until the second day, and Anime Hell disappeared this year. I spent most of it playing Twinkle Star Sprites and meeting Touhous.
The location and nearby food are really good, so convention recommended anyway.
- I have no idea what his name means. [↩]

subset: commoncrawl


text:
READ about Piers Morgan's long career in journalism here.
In the sequel to an energized and combative conversation from three weeks prior, on Wednesday evening "Piers Morgan Tonight" welcomed Larry Pratt back to the program, for a second interview that was nearly as contentious as the first.
The Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, Pratt once again joined host Piers Morgan to share his opinions and insight on the ongoing issue of firearms, and gun control, in the United States.
Standing firm with his consistent view that the American public needs less weapons in general – and should be banned from owning assault weapons in particular – Morgan aired a video clip of Stanley McChrystal, a retired Army General, echoing such a perspective.
Questioning how Pratt could disagree with the experience of someone like McChrystal, Morgan provided some additional background, and posed his question:
"The last four mass shootings in the last five months have all involved the AR-15 style - military style - assault rifle. Widely available as you know. Even in Connecticut which has supposedly quite tough gun control laws," stated the host. "Why do you feel so strongly that civilians, despite what we just heard from a leading general, should still be able to have access to these killing machines?"
Once having referred to Morgan as "morally obtuse," Pratt answered:
"Well, because the general and his troops are not going to be there to protect the average American, the military nor the police after social order implodes, after a hurricane, after an earthquake, during riots. And his experience, and I very much appreciate his service to the country and the military. But he is not dealing with what civilians have to put up with in the vacuum of somebody being around to protect them. We're on our own."
Continuing with the "Guns in America" subject matter, Morgan used his platform to later welcome Jessica Watts and Tom Teves, each a relative of someone killed during the mass-shooting in an Aurora, Colo. movie theater last July.
"I definitely think, Piers, that more guns are not the answer," said Watts, who lost her cousin Jonathan Blunk on July 20, 2012. "That puts that many more guns in the hands of people who've got mental illness and it becomes very much a fear factor for people nationwide."
Teves, meanwhile, lost his son Alex in the movie theater massacre, and on a day which marked the end of the preliminary hearing of shooting suspect James Holmes, Morgan asked him to respond to Pratt's earlier argument for lesser gun control, and more access to weapons:
"I struggle with it," he admitted. "A., I wonder what he'd think if he was in my shoes. Two, think about the scene – and we got a pretty good understanding of what the scene was like today – that night, and only the people that were in there can really know. And I think that we need to recognize that. But, there was smoke, people couldn't see, he had an automatic weapon, he had an automatic shotgun, he had two revolvers that didn't need to be reloaded so if somebody - they are not going to walk in with an assault weapon – so what are they going to do? They're going to stand up in the fog and shoot at him. He had ballistic equipment. Everybody including him around that person who shot at him would be dead. If there were ten people in there and people started running around you might have had 15 or 20 more people shot from friendly fire. I don't know that's the answer."
Watch the clips and listen to the interviews, as Morgan and his guests continue their discussion on guns in America.
» Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Twitter
» Follow "Piers Morgan Tonight" on Instagram
No one is really saying we need more guns. The only thing we want is no more of these shootings. If that means limiting the magazines then so be it, but it needs to be something that is proven to work.
Mr. Morgan is not apologizing for his a very unethical way how to conduct an interview with an American citizens. I am old, not even USA citizen and I had never owned a gun. NO, I cannot expect any other response from this arrogant man with a limited intellectual capability of the present century.
His problem is, that his mind is somewhere in the last century, when an English man came to
another country and dictated there his way, or highway – of course with guns.
He came to the USA as a host and acting like an old English colonialist – dictating, declaring his way as only the way and treating the US citizens like a slaves, or just a something
lover in the humanity than him – the colonialist. Than he even lies with his so called statistics.
Never mind, this is his colonialist way. If there is not a problem with guns, he would find something else to dictate his way. No, he is not serious journalist. He is a shame for
journalists and of course also for the English people. They are far ahead of his brain ability
and his acting. Therefore he is not welcomed also in England. I just feel a deep sorrow for this
poor man!
Greg Hrab, Canada
There is one subject regarding gun control that I have not heard from anyone from either side. The 223 rounds that are used in some assault rifles are for killing people. The Dept. of Fish and Game can regulate what type of gun and ammuntion you can use to kill different types of game, but we allow military type ammunition to be sold to the public. Even if a gun law is passed banning assault type weapons, there are still the ones already on the street so how do you control them? By controlling the ammunition as military use only. Why aren't people more important than animals? Just a suggestion, I would love to know what you think of this idea. You are doing a great job with the NRA, the more they talk the more people realize they are not interested in the effects of the gun laws on safety.
No, you are wrong. The 223 is to give the military a low recoil round that wounds people. That is why they use NATO rounds and not the rounds we use in a hunting situation. The 223 is a very lite high powered rifle. In fact, I don't own a high powered rifle as lite as a 223. I do have a 22-250 and that is close to a 223, but still has more energy. The problem in this debate is failure to communicate accurate information. Information that groups like the NRA should be putting out there in place of all this stupid stuff they have been saying. My definition of an assault rifle is any weapon that can keep firing without a reload after a reasonable number of defensive rounds has been fired.
the 223 round is one of the most favored rounds of hunters, it is quite excellent for use on small game type creatures. it is not allowed in most states for anything larger than a coyote. Anything bigger it may not kill quickly. Bonnie, the reason the military likes 233/5.56 rounds is they don't kill quickly. i would support more mental health services involved in a gun purchase. I support every LAW WE NOW HAVE ON THE BOOKS.. ENFORCE THOSE.
Thanks..... It is good to read real ballistic facts about this demonized 223 round. If the laws are based on such un-educated information, we are all in big trouble.
the .223 is concidered a hunting round, the 5.56mm nato is the military rnd. the .223 makes less pressure in the breach (chamber) then the 5.56mm..the 5.56 mm makes a lot more pressure in the chamber.. you can shoot a .223 in a 5.56mm chambered rifle but you should never shoot a 5.56mm in a .223 chambered rifle because it is not designed to handle the added pressure of the 5.56mm rnd.... now this is the gospel of the .223 rnd verses 5.56mm rnd. ( if you measure the diameter of both these rnd you will see there basically the same diameter)....
You are right. It was developed off the 222 hunting round. It is nothing more than a super fast 22 rifle.
The public is banned from purchasing Armored Piercing rounds for any firearm. I have one AR-15 in my collection. This rifle is not the military version. All military version are equip with full automatic. All my firearms only have the option of semi- automatic because full autos are banned to the public..
For that piers to call his guest a liar because his data is different than his was completely unprofessional and immature. Any good reporter would research both sets and find out where the discrepancy was before insulting a person. Then turned around and told this man he didn't like him very well. I've an idea for you piers. You surely are scared by our freedom circling this and if you don't like what we are allowed to have, take your brit ass back across the pond where you will be as safe as that government will let you.
One last comment. Responsible people are capable of many things. One of them is owning firearms. But since the people who are up to no good and find ways to obtain the same weapons the responsible can own, It seems we have to lose our rights to make sure the criminals can't arm themselves. Where is the logic in that?
Larry Pratt turn thy gun on thyself.
GUN CONTROL? Missing the whole point! Today 3 people under the age of 21 will die in car accidents, and 9 people over 21 will dies in car accidents in the good ole US of A !! 12 a day KILLED, MURDERED – by intoxicated driving!! 84 – that's EIGHTY FOUR
Yup, that is actually a lot bigger issue and we are ignoring it talking about guns which we all like to do.
Someone is ignoring the problem of drunk driving and drunk driving-related deaths? Have you been asleep for 50 years??
Laws about drunk driving have got increasingly tougher: longer sentences, especially for repeat offenders; more and longer driving bans; lower blood alcohol limits; and in some places, special rules for young drivers, and higher legal drinking ages.
People and businesses who serve intoxicated patrons are being held civilly liable for the harm and damage they cause when they get behind the wheel.
Police have implemented many programs to apprehend drunk drivers on the roads. Members of the public are sensitive to the problem and report drunk drivers to police.
Voluntary groups run programs to drive intoxicated people home. Television stations run public service announcements against drunk driving. Cities and states and provinces run public education campaigns about the harm caused by drunk driving and ways of avoiding it, like designated drivers, and businesses offer free non-alcoholic beverages to designated drivers.
Injuries and deaths associated with drunk driving have declined in the US - although other countries, which apply harsher rules, have seen a greater decline. The CDC says that drunk driving incidents declined by 30% in the last five years. Since 1982, fatalities associated with drunk driving have gone down by over 50% (even as the population, and especially traffic volumes, have increased).
How could anyone possibly say that anyone is "ignoring" the problem of drunk driving??
If only the problem of firearms violence got as much attention! If there were even public campaigns about locking up your guns as there are about handing over your car keys when you drink ... just imagine how many people, especially kids, might be alive today.
My point was that the number of deaths from drunk drivers is still higher than the gun violence. A ban on guns will not solve the problem that has created this media storm. It has very little to do with guns. Don't get me wrong, we need to do something about gun violence or let's just say violence in America.
There is a huge difference between car deaths and gun deaths. Usually, car deaths are not intentional. Gun deaths are almost always intentional.
Anti gunner's are deff getting and repeating made up stats, they hear and repeat, uneducated to say the least..
"Proven to work"? What more proof does anyone need but the firearms crime/injury/homicide numbers from every other similar country in the world. where there *are* limits like these?
Has anyone ever "proved" any law or social policy to work? Does any law or policy ever absolutely prevent everything it is intended to prevent? Of course not. We have laws against murder and theft, and still there are murders and thefts. But no one would argue that we do not have *fewer* of them than if there were no laws.
Laws against speeding don't stop people from speeding, or stop traffic fatalities from happening. But they do reduce overall speeds, and reduce the number of people driving at unsafe speeds, and reduce the speed at which many people drive - and reduce the number of traffic fatalities. When combined with more seatbelt use, less drunk driving, better vehicle construction, public awareness campaigns, and better trauma care, they reduce the number of traffic fatalities even more.
If you approach gun injury and death the way you approach traffic injury and death, it is obvious that no single measure will solve the problem (and nothing will ever eliminate the problem entirely) - but each measure can have some effect, even without the others. Reducing speed limits reduces traffic fatalities, even without raising seatbelt use and improving trauma care. So too with the many ways of limiting access to guns by people who should not have them, and limiting the damage they are able to do with them.
Banning these kinds of firearms, and high-capacity magazines, will *make it harder* for people to get them, and to commit mass murders with guns. And it will get increasingly harder over time.
Just as installing speed bumps and stop signs *makes it harder* for people to speed, even if they don't care what the law says, don't care about other people's safety and aren't afraid of getting caught - and so fewer people speed where those measures are in place together with speed limits.
There is nothing magical about guns that makes it harder to apply a policy to them than to anything else.
We don't turn a blind eye if unlicensed drivers drive on X Street, but ticket them if they drive on Y Street. So why allow people who can't pass a background check to buy guns privately or at gun shows without a background check? The law says they may not do that - but there is nothing to stop them if they don't care what the law says. Put a speed bump in their way: require a background check for all gun sales everywhere, not just from dealers. Law-abiding gun owners will not break the law by selling them guns without a background check.
Anyone who demands "proof" (and I don't mean Jackie who posted here) that banning high capacity magazines won't make it harder to commit mass murder, and that requiring background checks for all gun sales won't make it harder for criminals to get guns, must have some goal other than reducing mass murders and reducing the number of guns in criminals' hands.
84 a week! May I ask ? What is the federal government doing about killing 84 people a week? Any New restrictions? A new committee with Biden in charge? That would help !!!!
Pierce is lying about his statistics on violence in the US. Also the article stated that the shooter had automatic weapons. That is completely untrue also. The worst 2 mass shootings in the world were both done with handguns so an assault weapons ban is simply feel good legislation. One of those shootings was in Pierces beloved GB. Pierce is a hack and needs to be called on the carpet for his misrepresentation of the facts. Hack reporting that should not be tolerated in the US. Check the news source below that fact checked Pierce's lies. Pierces beloved Great Brittan that he touts as 57 gun murders does not make up for the fact that GB has more murders per capita than the US and the EU has said that GB is the second most violent country in the entire EU. Proof that if you take guns away sick people will just find other ways of killing each other. Stop trying to punish law abiding citizens and go after the real problem. Messed up people! http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=N9efqhGBHZI
The fact that people feel comfortable telling or repeating lies in public about such important public issues bodes very badly for the future of your country.
"'GB has more murders per capita than the US"
This is such an outright, blatant, bald-faced lie that anyone who tells it or repeats it should be shunned and excluded from polite company for life.
The quibbles about rates are understandable in one way: official murder numbers for England/Wales, for example, are tabulated for the *fiscal year*, while popular sources often do a count of the number for a calendar year to report to their reader. I expect that Mr. Morgan's figures are the former, and some of the figures being bandied about, if they are at all real, are the latter.
The fact remains that there have been no more than 60 firearms homicides in England/Wales (with a population about 1/6 the population of the US) in ... well, pretty much ever.
And the fact is that total homicde rates for 2011 (it is too early to have firm figures for 2012 yet) look like this, for example:
Canada 1.6
France 1.1
Australia 1.0
Germany 0.8
The vast majority of homicides in the US *would not have happened* without firearms: you do kill someone at a distance by throwing a rock at them, you do not kill an innocent bystander or a child asleep in its bed by throwing a knife across a bar or through a wall, you do not kill your wife or girlfriend and then yourself by suffocating her and then jumping off a bridge, you do not turn an argument into a murder by punching someone.
Watch the video and follow their sources. Legit news source. You can say what you want the news source was backed by traceable fact sources. You live in your world I will live in the real one.
But two of the countries you have on your list, Germany and France, are the 4th and 5th largest gun owning nations in the world, and yet their overall homicide rates are significantly lower than Britain's. While Britain has a low gun murder rate, it's its total overall murder rate that needs to be considered. Looking at the total murder rate demonstrates the flaw in Morgan's argument, especially when you start making homicide rate comparison between some of Britain's large gun owning European neighbors, such as Germany, France, Switzerland, Italy and Spain, you will see that these all have lower murder rates than gun free Britain. If you subscribe to Morgan's notion that more guns mean more crime, then all of these large European countries should have substantially higher murder rates than Britain's, but they don't.
YES, peirs is using cnn air time to run his mouth with made up stats, people who know the real truth are blown away by this fact, and he just keeps on running his big arogent mouth..OH and ignorant mouth as well...
I hate the term "Assault Weapon" to describe these rifles. A Semi-auto AR-15 is a precision rifle. The .223 ammo was first introduced as a civilian round for varmint hunting. ALL semi-auto weapons are equal with rate of fire. You pull the trigger, it fires one round. You must release the trigger and pull it again to fie another one. PM is lying when he says 4-6 rounds per minute as a rate of fire. PM showed what was claimed to be a semi-auto AR-15 firing, WRONG, it was a Class III select fire weapon, clearly firing in full auto mode, the video was mislabeled. No human could possibly pull the trigger repeatedly and get 4 rounds off in a second, let alone six! PM STOP SPREADING YOUR LIES TO AMERICA!
Wow another gun educated person seeing how incredibly stupid this man is.....way to go !!, this man needs to leave our country asap....nit wit twit describes him well
To be honest PM needs to move back to England. If you do not like the laws we have then move. Yes what happened was a serious tragedy, but know what you are talking about before trying to preach your message you sound like an idiot trying to get ratings. In England where people aren't allowed to have firearms like in the U.S the crime is huge because criminals have the guns not the citizens. Check the facts online, also look at the crime in Australia, same scenario. Don't dare come to this country get on tv and tell ua americans what is right and how it should be. Like I said you don't like it MOVE.
I was compelled to go to this page of CNN's as regardless if I/we like PM or not, don't you find it odd that he is the ONLY one who will confront this issue? I like that he is doing so. I know that the 2nd Amendment protects your right to bear arms, but give it some thought – that was written long before the current technology was in place. I say, keep your guns except for selling new assault weapons, and put the focus on controlling the sale of ammunition. My own sister has several guns and is opposite from me on this issue. I'm in AZ and she's in Texas. Our regions help define us; I personally do not want that much power in my hands and do not and will not own any guns. Anyway, keep at it Piers, and give them a run for thier money.
CORRECTION -That's 4-6 rounds per second, not minute that PM is lying about!!!!!!!!!!
The NRA needs to quit being so smug because they think this debate is already won in the house and senate. The NRA these terms "Assault rifle" and "Military style weapon". These are real hot buttons and at some point the public view that is being lead down that path is going to change the house and senate. We need to talk about the 223 round and why the military is using that lite rifle load. We need to talk about high capacity magazines and what we can do to keep them out of the reach of children. The NRA needs to wake up and take this to a new level. We had a general on national television saying stupid stuff, but the NRA didn't say a word about it. People took what he said as being from an expert. It didn't matter if his comments were out of line and in error.
the 223 is basically concidered a hunting round it makes less pressure in the breach (chamber) then a 5.56mm nato round which makes more pressure. you can shoot a .223 in a 5.56mm but you should not shoot a 5.56mm in a .223 chambered rifle because there not designed for the added pressure of the 5.56mm nato..
It was always my understanding that a 223 was developed from the 222 hunting round. They just pushed it a little faster.
How about this: ban military style assault weapon at the same time allow teachers to carry light firearmas.
Please define a "military style assault weapon".
@jackie: any firearm with a detachable magazine
My browning X-bold 30.06 has a detachable magazine. It is a bolt action hunting rifle. Need a better way to define a military style assault weapon than just detachable magazine.
The full "technical" term of one is a weapon that has pistol grip and can except a magazines that has a select fire switch that can fire in a full auto and in single fire. Now the dangerous part of this gun ban is your rifle because it can except the magazine could be called an "assault" rifle or even worst since its a high powered rifle with a scope it could be called a "sniper" rifle. Again its not about what we like it's about freedom.
It is a hunting rifle so I guess it falls under being a "sniper" rifle. Last deer I shot was 526yds. Yep, guess I better put it back in the box and get ready to send it to the government.
an assult weapon is fully automatic, one pull and hold the trigger it will continue to fire round after round, the weapons they keep calling assult weapons only shoot one round for one trigger pull,,,,this nit wit keeps referring to semi auto's as full auto's...peirs is an IDIOT with a mouth and a tv show...PERIOD
I agree. He is part of the probelm.
"allow teachers to carry light firearmas"
(a) You know as well as everyone else that the vast majority of teachers will NOT carry firearms into their classroom. Most teachers in the US want to teach, not act as paramilitary guards. (And obviously, some teachers are as unsuitable for possessing firearms as anyone else in the public, and permitting them to bring firearms onto school property could create situations as dangerous as in any other workplace.) Simply "allowing" teaches to carry firearms would be ineffective at best and dangerous at worst.
(b) The presence of firearms in a location is NOT a deterrent to someone who decides to commit a mass murder (and all the talk about "gun-free zones" being targets is just nonsense) - most mass murderers intend to commit suicide and/or expect to be killed by police.
(c) A teacher carrying a firearm in a school would have to have it on their person at all times, including travelling to and from the school, while using the washroom, etc. Would teachers have to use the toilet in pairs? Who would guard their students then? More impotantly, the teacher would be vulnerable to students or others who wanted their firearm: they would become targets themselves. Guns, not gun-free zones, are what most criminals want.
(d) If teachers - or, as some have suggested, principals/administrators (as some suggested would have prevented deaths in Newtown) - were to have access to firearms kept locked up on school property, the firearms would have to be stored there permanently, or removed during non-school hours. Guns stored on school premises at night, or being transported by school personnel, would be targets for thieves / put the personnel at risk.
(e) The presence of someone with a gun does NOT *prevent* incidents like these. It could possibly reduce the number of injuries and fatalities - if the person with the gun were in the right place at the right time, had no doubt about the nature of the situation, had a clear shot, had the necessary competence and calmness to take the shot, etc.
Gun nut fantasies are not useful contributions to public policy discussions.
thats the point.. Teachers largely will opt not to carry firearms..but they are legally allowed if they chose to (progun partially happy), assault weapon are banned (antigun partially happy).... could be an area of compromise that could lead to quick action...The hope is future school shooting will have relatively less fatality.
@Piers More Gun: what nonsense.
The goal here is not to make "pro-gun" or "anti-gun" happy. The goal is not compromise. It is effectiveness.
It is to reduce mass murders.
(I have no idea why anyone would be "pro" or "anti" guns. They are just objects. Personally, I am "pro" making it very difficult for people at risk of causing harm to get their hands on guns.)
I don't agree. I think this is just politics gone crazy and has very little to do with preventing these mass shootings. I can only hope that the Whitehouse is really looking into solutions to the problem.
Well said.
I am a gun owner and I am responsible. I keep my firearms in a safe, locked at all times. I am not an NRA member nor will I ever be. These crazy arguments coming from the conspiracy theorists are the same ones I heard back in the 90's from the NRA. I have friends that used to give me literature from the NRA saying that the government wants to steal your guns like Hitler and Stalin did, and it was going to happen soon if they didn't get more members to stop this tyrannical government. Wouldn't it be nice if the NRA would teach responsible gun ownership without the fear of everything that goes bump in the night. The NRA should be about educating responsible gun owners about safety, but they are a political organization with some crazy beliefs and very crazy members.
I'd love to see a concealed weapons ban for MOST people. If you think the government is out to get your guns or that everyone walking down the street in a hoodie looks like a criminal then you shouldn't have one. You can take a class at our local flea market to get your CWP.... very scary.
Depends on the state. I am a combat vet who has also been in civilian law enforcement for years and now has a TS from the gov yet I can't get a CC permit in my state because it is a may issue state. Yet we have some of the worst fans and hun crimes in the country. I can't have a CC to protect my family but that has not stopped the ganbangers and wackos from killing people in the tens of hundreds each year here in NJ. If I do apply and get turned down which I would I will then have to answer that I have been turned down for a permit if I wish to purchase a firearm thus making it impossible to purchase another firearm with the current background check system. I am all for sensible gun laws. I don't have a problem making all firearms sales get a mandatory background check. I would be for mental health evals if it was done in away that states like mine did not just use them as a means to not allow you to purchase a firearm. I have already passed many background checks for everything I have achieved in life but there is a big fear that NJ would use stricter gun laws as a means to deny someone like me the ability to legally purchase a firearm. As it is it takes almost 4 months to purchase a handgun in NJ. None of these strict laws have helped save lives in NJ and they have put those that follow the laws like I do at risk of being a victim instead of a survivor.
Piers, your arguments are pathetic and weak, quit interupting guests and lying about stats. Have you ever even shot a gun? There are no 'assault weapons' in public hands, only if they pay a very expensive tax stamp, and they are very low numbers. A 'fully automatic weapon' costs in the tens of thousands of dollars at the least. A 'fully automatic assault weapon' that you keep harping about is only on the battlefield in the hands of military men and women. The only weapons that are available are semi-automatic weapons. Educate yourself, your ad hominem arguments would be easy to rip apart in a debate. Most of the congress have concealed carry permits which I'm sure you know, but fail to tell your audience. Are you brittish or english? Violent crime goes up when guns are taken from the people. Check the real stats and stop the strawman arguements. You are morally obtuse. You are well educated, but you raise your voice when you are caught and try to switch the game up. You commit logical fallacies right on air constantly. Learn what an 'assault weapon' really is tart.
Keep up the good work Piers – shining a light on some of these CRAZY gun advocates and the number of guns (including assault weapons) circulating in the USA makes me as a Canadian afraid to visit that country. INSANE is an understatement of how much the Americans love their guns. You would think that a person would want to spend quality time with their family rather than out on some rifle range target practising on a target in the shape of a human being. Can't figure that out.
It seems to me there are three reasons to have an AR-15 at home: to help counter a massive invasion by an armed foreign power, for protection during a riot or other major upheaval, and to defend against a tyrannical United States government that begins to oppress the people with fascist methods. I think most reasonable people would agree that first and last of these scenarios are extremely unlikely and the second is rare. (Even during such a disruption of order as a riot or other failure of infrastructure, the power of an AR-15 would not be necessary for most situations.) The real issue in the minds of AR-15 proponents, I suspect, is their fear that the US government actually will come after them in force, à la Randy Weaver, which will certainly happen in a few cases (justifiably, it is to be hoped) but is in my view otherwise and largely a paranoid belief.
I think there is really only one good reason to impose a federal ban on assault weapons and large capacity magazines (assuming other guns are not to be affected): to reduce—by 10-20%?—the number of victims in future attacks by mentally disturbed young males. Isn't that reason enough?
I am going to agree with you. I think we need a ban on high capacity magazines. I don't think the AR-15 even enters into the issue after you do that. It doesn't require some major buyback program that we can't afford. It takes the current magazines off the street or at least in all the cases we have seen, the people that owned them would have surrendered them. We need to reach out to these kids that are outcast and bullied in schools.
Jackie I really don't like them either but for the same reasons most likely. We as gun owners need to realize that it's not about what we "like" it's about our freedoms. It takes less than two seconds for anyone to swap out the magazines so to say that you can only have a ten round magazine wont stop a person carrying ten magazines. I know I have said this before but for some reason I feel I have to keep saying this, they make up less than one percent of all gun deaths in the US. Another thing I don't see people talking about the last three mass shootings of the other common item is the fact that all three people where on drugs that says they can cause suicidal thoughts, depression and violent thoughts. Now I am not saying that everyone who is on these drugs are the next person who will kill someone but the same can be said about the "assault" rifle.
.kantill, Point well made. The magazine change out can be a task under pressure. That is why they always have that as part of most shooting sports as well as on that top shot show. Those guys where very familiar with their weapon and still had issues during the reloads at time. The Gifford shooter dropped the magazine during the reload and a bystander picked it up and he was disarmed. He had already shot 33. The idea of fewer rounds in the clip means more opportunity to disarm the suspect. Every time he has to reload, he has to drop, install and rechamber a round. While we might be able to do that very fast under some pressure, I don't think these guys we have been seeing in these shootings will have that mastered. I don't want to give up any rights, but limitations are a way of life. We already limit the fully automatic weapons and silencers. Put the high capacity magazines under the same guide lines. What ya think?
For the sandy hook shooting it took over twenty minutes for the police to get there so I don't think he was under that much pressure. The funny thing is you keep calling them a "high" capacity but the standard capacity to the AR platform. It isn't a add on option. Since you asked no I don't agree with any of it and I'll tell you why. Again looking at sandy hook the guy killed his mother (against the law) stole her guns (against the law) proceeded to kill lots of unarmed people (again against the law), can you guess the common thread? Can you guess the other common thread to the sandy hook and the other mass shootings? The gun men where on drugs that have been known to cause violent thoughts and suicidal thoughts.
I understand the guy was breaking the law long before he entered the school. I know the AR has a standard size magazine. During the assault weapons ban the standard was 10 rounds and now the Springfield xdm 9MM standard magazine is 19 rounds. We don't know what would happen at Sandy Hook if he had to change magazines. Maybe one of those teachers would have reached him on a reload. We just don't know. We do know it takes time a skill changing out magazines and in all of these cases would have given people a chance to take action. As it was in Colorado, he had so much suppression fire, that there was no way to approach. I know I am suggesting a limitation and a big issue to force people to surrender magazines. I really do believe it would make a difference. You don't have to ban an AR-15 or even go down that slippery slope because no one really wants one with a five round clip.
@kantill: "Again looking at sandy hook the guy killed his mother (against the law) stole her guns (against the law) proceeded to kill lots of unarmed people (again against the law), can you guess the common thread?"
Uh, it's pretty obvious, isn't it?
No guns, no improper gun storage, no gun theft, no gun murders. Huh.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree. As it stands, I really think we are going to see a ban on the AR-15. I think we are going to see a ban that allows what is currently in the market to remain there and I think the ban on high capacity magazines will be the same as the last assault weapons ban. All the anti-gun people will go home and sleep well. Only problem is the Sandy Hook shooting would have still happened if we never terminated the last assault weapons ban just like this knew one is going to be. It was a pre-ban gun. This is all just politics and no one is really going to do anything that will stop these shootings. So the people that are running out and buying all these guns before this new ban starts are the smart one.
No the answer is look at who and why. His mother was trying to get him committed before the shooting but because the mental health system in this country so jacked she couldn't. If he didn't have access to a gun he could have easily killed those kids with other weapons, evil is evil. Just like China, China you can't own a gun yet 22 kids the same day as sandy hook and they have a history of this type violence. UK according you and Piers the greatest place on earth has people dying by the thousands but as long its not by a gun you don't CARE. Chicago, New York and LA all have the most murders including gun related but again have the strictest gun control laws. When are you anti-gun people going to face the facts not emotions? If you want to save people than look at the real issues in this country not what scares you.
First off I am not anti-gun. Second, I agree with you that we need to get these kids help. Columbine was all about bullying. Teachers just watched it and did nothing until it blew up in their face. No justification, but it really wasn't the gun.
The problem with your numbers is the fact the "assault" rifle makes up less than one percent of all gun deaths in the US. If this was really to save lives than it would be about taking away the guns and magazines not leave them in the population. This is about control not gun but people. And the reason I can say this is if we where really trying to save a life we would ban baseball bats, cars, alcohol and I could on and on because all of these kill people every day much more than guns. Again all I ask of anyone is to do their own research before believing people like Piers, they are not to keep you or your children safe. Since they ARMED body guards for themselves and their families.
On another issue, the question of why anyone would randomly murder small children, it occurs to me that the (deranged) reason for Adam Lanza's attack may have been that he believed something a sane person would not: that, for example, the children were possessed by the devil or by evil aliens from outer space, or perhaps more likely, that his own life was so miserable that he believed he was sparing the children the (to him) insufferable wretchedness of being alive.
Piers Morgan is doing nothing to help the discussion on gun control in our country. He's rude to his guests, calling them names and editorializing at the end of each interview and, he uses hyperbole when discussing the issues. A couple of weeks ago he referred to a semi-automatic as a "machine gun". I understand why many are calling for his deportation!!
Tragically and repeatedly mental illness has been the major contributor in 4 out of 4 shootings that have been some of the worse violent crimes involving firearms.
2007 Virginia Tech, The shooter, Cho, had been medically adjudicated as mentally ill in 2005. Obviously, he still was able to purchase the handguns used to kill those students.
33 killed, 17 wounded
Only handguns used, a .22 Caliber Walther and a 9mm Glock
2011 Gabrielle Giffords Tuscon, AZ The shooter Loughner had a history of behavioral problems due to mental illness and wouldn't take his medications, even though mentally ill he is in prison for 7 life terms.
6 killed and 13 wounded
9mm Glock Handguns used
2012 Aurora Co Theatre Shootong. The shooter Holmes was being treated for mental illness by a College Psychiatrist, unfortunately after his Psychiatrist notified law enforcement that he was a danger to himself and others, it was treated as a low priority and he then acted out killing 19 people and wounding 59.
He used a AR-15 which jammed, Remington 12 gauge Shotgun and a 9mm Glock killed and wounded most of the victims.
2012 Newtown School Massacre – Adam Lanza had some mental disorder illness and 27 people were killed.
The shooter used a AR-15 but was carrying a 10mm and 9mm Glock Pistols
4 horrific event with over 80 people killed and over 100 people injured that essentially most likely could or and should have been stopped. Gun control had nothing to do with this, masculinity had nothing to do with this, Essentially these murderers all had known mental health issues/disorders only to fall through the system or lack of system and kill.
Mr. Morgan thinks these "Assault weapons" are the problem. So when we take assault weapons from the mentally ill they will use handguns and shotguns, right? I'd rather be shot by the AR-15 with its full metal non expanding bullet than a handgun with hollow point expanding to twice its size bullet or buckshot from a 12 gauge.
Every time someone on his show has tried to bring up this fact he starts to yell and insult them. Again people please do not listen to him and spend just a little time on google and with some level heads and common sense we can "do" something but its giving up your freedoms.
but its NOT giving up your freedoms.
The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it.
Albert Einstein
I know most of NRA members and NRA probably never heard of this guy.
Here is an idea, put in place a law controling the number of bullets a gun owner can purchase, licence the gun and the owner, attach that licence to the drive's licence of the person or another form of identification, utilizing a centralized data base, set a limit on how many bullets the owner for that licence can purchase. All retailers including on-line sellers, would have to log into the data base with the client ID code to fill an order, if they are at the limit the retailer would not be able to process an order. I know nothing about guns but I am sure that all bullet production has to be batched and numbered, the batch number would be attached to the order. Each gun would have a seperate licence under a master client ID, this would allow control of just switching guns to buy more bullets. Register, licence, ID, audit the sellers and control the bullet consumption.
Ever heard of 'Big Brother' and total control. Law abiding, intelligent individuals can control their own actions.
Really, did you read 1984 and decide it was real? Real people died for no reason in a safe city (aurora) and in school. Do we feel it freedom when it takes the lives of innocent children. Bad things happen, sure, don't we feel as responsible adults/parents/professionals/citizens/war vets that maybe its our duty to make killing more difficult.
First of all thank you for the debate you allow to happen through your show. I believe the real question is what kind of society we want? Do we want a society where every single citizen has to be armed to feel safe, or to do everything we can to have a safer place where each person can walk free without being armed. How tepid to think that more you arm people safer it is, just because then you will have an escalation of fire power, a hand gun against an assault weapon, then everybody should have an assault weapon, then what next? You can see how stupid this is, but our guess is not stupid at all, our guess is very smart to encourage people having gun, just because it is about MONEY! What all the debates, people don't highlight the real issue which allow lobbies to act and the reasons for them to protect gun usage, it is not 2nd amendment it is about MONEY, and politicians who are under the pressure of groups such as NRA are not worth to be elected because they are corrupted by such groups to help them to be elected. One word, all this is dirty, and children pay the price, but it is fine, just let do some business.
Piers you need to target the ammo! Take away the bullets, they are not protected by the second ammendment.
After all that is what killed!
Piers Morgan,
You arguments make no sense what so ever. You can not compare two unequal units to make a valid argument. US population is about 315 million, where the UK is 63 million. 315,000,000 / 63,000,000 = 5 The US has about 5 times as many people as the UK. Its no wonder the total violent crime here in the US is higher than the UK, just about anything you can think of will occur in higher amounts due to the 5 times higher population. You need to use comparable units to make an argument, Try violent crime per 100,000 and then tell me who has more crime, the US or UK? Go to the FBI crime stats and see how the violent crime rate is decreasing? How is that possible with the highest gun sales on record in the pass few years. How is it possible to have a higher crime rate when the 1994 assault weapons ban went into effect? I'll tell you why, its because criminals are afraid of getting shot with superior firepower when raiding a house. If I'm not mistake, the UK crime rate is on the rise. That's because criminals know UK families are for the most part defenseless because of the UK's bans. More guns in good hands does in FACT equal less crime. Proven with actual scientific evidence and proper scientifically comparable units.
Do you feel safer on the south side of Chicago or Boulder, Co? Where are there more weapons? How would you like to walk the streets in East St
Louis late at night? Plenty of guns in those parts of town, but i tend to.feel less safe. You cant drive 25 in a school zone for childrens safety, but the NRA feels weapons are school appropriate. When did common sense leave this debate? Btw, roy v
Wade can arguably be the biggest reason for the reduction in crime...just going by the stats ya know
Why is it PM did not bring up the average of 3000 gun CRIMES in London alone every year from 2006-2011. How is it these occur if guns are banned?
Mr. Morgan is not apologizing for his a very unethical way how to conduct an interview with an American citizens. I am old, not even USA citizen and I had never owned a gun. NO, I cannot expect any other response from this arrogant man with a limited intellectual capability of the present century.
His problem is, that his mind is somewhere in the last century, when an English man came to
another country and dictated there his way, or highway – of course with guns.
He came to the USA as a host and acting like an old English colonialist – dictating, declaring his way as only the way and treating the US citizens like a slaves, or just a something
lover in the humanity than him – the colonialist. Than he even lies with his so called statistics.
Never mind, this is his colonialist way. If there is not a problem with guns, he would find something else to dictate his way. No, he is not serious journalist. He is a shame for
journalists and of course also for the English people. They are far ahead of his brain ability
and his acting. Therefore he is not welcomed also in England. I just feel a deep sorrow for this
poor man!
Greg Hrab, Canada
Let's hear from the country that piers claims is safer now with gun control enacted. What do they want to tell us? Besides "don't let him come back here"... http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?feature=related&v=n9ZvwPmjJu4
Mr. Morgan, you should keep in mind that if it wasn't for us yanks and our assault weapons, you would be speaking German today. Go Home where there are no weapons at all, you'll be safe there.
how can these retarted dunb idiots like larry pratt and co be the executive members of any organisation???? I am glad i dont live in US, go aussie go!!!!!! I suppose if u guys can have some1 like sarah palin as a governor( and nominee for Vice President), bloody stupid !!!!
I don't own any guns and will not own any guns. As much as the folks who feel they have a right to their guns - well, consider also that I ALSO have a right to feel safe and getting these weapons and ammunition under control is a priority. While mental illness plays a part, there are also plenty of racist yahoos out there just waiting for their turn. Evolve people! I am just 2 miles away from the Tucson Tragedy site; I could not believe that it happened. And it just keeps happening...
All Americans are nuts. If you know history , you would understand how outdated your second amendment is today
PM, you have tried a new act since returning from Christmas break...you are quiet, calm, and 'civil', but alas it is an act. Before your vacation, you called people idiots and such, but now you are condescending and arrogant. Your 'reporting' is one sided, and frankly, worrisome. All of this pontificating is a publicity stunt...Mr. Morgan, let the government officials handle the affairs of OUR country. Your ranting is not helping, but is truly causing unrest in OUR country. If you want change in OUR country, become a citizen, cast a ballot, and even run for office. In the meantime, give it a rest...you are out of your league.
Don't you people realize that the whole world is laughing at you?
You have lost your mind. To take that position is to allow yourself to be a victimized by anyone that can overpower you. You would suggest that people just call 911 and wait for the police?
November 23, 2012 I learned after calling and speaking with Gregory Medek and his wife Rena in Aurora Colorado that their daughter Micayla's coffin was empty. Rena wanted to know "Where are they?" so I assume other people reported to have been killed are missing and the Aurora police are hiding that information. Micayla's funeral was attended by 1200 people including police chief Dan Oats and Gov. John Hickenlooper.
Absolutely written content material, regards for selective information.
I saw a lot of website but I think this one contains something special in it in it
Can I just say what a relief to find somebody who really knows what theyre talking about on the internet. You definitely know tips on how to bring a difficulty to gentle and make it important. Extra individuals must read this and perceive this facet of the story. I cant believe youre not more common because you definitely have the gift.
Wow, amazing blog layout! How long have you been blogging for? you made blogging look easy. The overall look of your site is magnificent, as well as the content!
I'm not that much of a internet reader to be honest but your sites really nice, keep it up! I'll go ahead and bookmark your site to come back down the road. All the best


text:
Sunrise on the Water/Sitting Ducks Theme Cremation Urn
"Sunrise on the Water" Cremation Urn
Vision Medical Exclusive
- Dimensions: 10.3" x 6.1"
- Capacity: 200 Cubic Inches
- Also available: Individual Keepsake with Velvet Box
- Engravable: No
This breathtaking urn from Vision Medical is the perfect tribute to the duck hunter or someone who enjoyed beautiful sunsets over a lake.
Featuring a high-resolution image, looking through the cattails with ducks sitting on the pond and a beautiful sunset reflecting off the water.
This urn can be proudly displayed anywhere in the home. Crafted from high-quality materials, the finish is sure to last thanks to a strong finish.
The keepsake's photo resolution is in keeping with the outstanding quality of the adult size. Resolution and quality can often be lost in duplicating keepsakes but not in this case.
Ships within 24 hours from our GA warehouse. If this is an "at need" item, please call us to place your order. For Next Day delivery, orders MUST be placed by noon EST. Saturday delivery is not available.
Why are there no prices on your urns or jewelry? In order to access pricing, you must contact Vision Medical customer service to receive a login.
Do you charge sales tax? We do not charge sales tax except in our home state of Georgia. We are obligated to charge both county and state taxes.
What forms of payment do you accept? We accept Visa, Mastercard, Discover, American Express and Paypal.
When can I expect my order? Generally speaking, standard FedEx shipping takes 1 to 5 business days in the contiguous 48 states.
Can I get overnight or second day delivery? Yes, but orders must be placed before 12:00 pm EST.
Do you ship outside the US? No, only the contiguous 48 states.
How do you ship? We ship exclusively with FedEx.
Do you offer engraving on cremation urns? Yes, we offer personalization on certain urns. Urns that can be engraved are so marked. Standard engraving is 2-3 lines. Call customer service for pricing.
How long does engraving take? Please allow at least 3-4 business days for approval of proof of engraving.
We offer a 100% satisfaction guarantee policy. If within 14 days of receiving your product you are not completely satisfied for any reason, we will replace the product or refund your money.
- Please inspect all merchandise upon arrival for possible damage
- Keep all original packaging as you received it for at least 14 days
- You must contact Vision Medical within 14 days of receiving your order at firstname.lastname@example.com
- Our team of customer service professionals will work with you to satisfy your business needs
We Also Recommend


text:
Updated 3:20 PM PST
CALGARY – A review panel has recommended that the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline that would carry bitumen from Alberta's oilsands to tankers on the British Columbia coast go ahead.
But the panel has attached 209 conditions, which cover everything from protecting caribou habitat to research into how the oil would behave in a marine environment.
The controversial proposal has pitted Calgary-based Enbridge (TSX:ENB) against environmental groups and First Nations, who have raised concerns about potential oilspills on land or in the water off the B.C. coast. The panel says any environmental effects can be mitigated effectively if its conditions are met.
Supporters say the pipeline is critical if Alberta is to get its oil to emerging markets in Asia. The panel's report says that opening up that market is important to the Canadian economy and the benefits far outweigh the risks.
The panel did suggest that Enbridge must be able to prove it would have the financial resources immediately available to respond to any cleanup of a spill or other damage.
"Northern Gateway must file with the (National Energy Board) for approval, at least nine months prior to applying for leave to open, a financial assurances plan … capable of covering the costs of liabilities for … cleanup, remediation and other damages caused by the project during the operation phase," the report says.
The final decision rests with the federal government, which has roughly six months to respond.
Federal Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver said the government will thoroughly review the report and consult with aboriginal groups before making that decision.
The cost of the pipeline appears to have sky-rocketed. It had been pegged at more than $6 billion, but the report released Thursday used a $7.9-billion price tag, which includes pre-development costs and marine navigation enhancements.
Enbridge said in a news release that it will work toward meeting the conditions.
"We will closely analyze the panel's conditions — many of which reflect commitments we put forward at the hearings — and continue to listen and be open to change," project leader Janet Holder said.
B.C. Environment Minister Mary Polak said the province wants to assess whether the panel's report addresses five conditions B.C. has set out before it will support the pipeline.
[quote]We are not yet in a position to consider support for any heavy oil pipeline in B.C.[/quote]
The Alberta government welcomed the panel's recommendation that the pipeline go ahead. Environment Minister Diana McQueen called it a "critical milestone toward getting Alberta's oil to new international markets."
Reaction from opponents was swift.
The Raincoast Conservation Foundation said political and corporate agendas won out over the interests of the public. And David Miller of the World Widlife Fund questioned how the panel could acknowledge the environmental risks, but still support the pipeline.
"I think the case is very clear that there is a real risk to the environment, the local economy and the social well-being of people who live in this region," Miller said. "The (joint review panel) agrees with that yet it's full steam ahead.
"I think that decision is very unwise."
Miller suggested it's still important for people to voice their concerns.
[quote]It's in the political arena now and it's up to people to continue to speak up. Our First Nations friends have legal rights as well, and I'm quite certain that coastal First Nations and others will be looking to ensure that their legal rights are respected.[/quote]
If approved by the federal government, the pipeline will probably be just the first to put billions of dollars into the coffers of Alberta, Ottawa and other provincial governments — not to mention the bank accounts of Enbridge and the international companies with a stake in the project.
The pipeline faced an uphill battle in B.C. where the environmental movement was bolstered by a decades-old "War in the Woods" against old-growth logging.
Enbridge and the oilpatch drastically underestimated the power of Green Corp., the older, wiser and better-funded modern version of the tie-dyed denizens who were arrested trying to save trees in the 1990s. Flush with cash from green philanthropists largely from south of the border, groups such as Forest Ethics Advocacy, the Dogwood Initiative and Rising Tides mounted a relentless campaign in Canada and abroad.
Growing concern over climate change has been a factor.
Northern Gateway and other pipeline projects — Keystone XL to the U.S. Gulf Coast, the reversal of Enbridge's Line 9 through Ontario and Quebec, and Kinder Morgan's proposed expansion of its Trans Mountain line to Metro Vancouver — mean production in the Alberta oilsands could triple by 2035, also increasing greenhouse gas emissions.
But protests in B.C. have been more of the grassroots, not-in-my-ocean variety.
There are also concerns that the heavy, molasses-like diluted bitumen coming from the oilsands is more corrosive and difficult to clean up in the event of a spill.
But perhaps the toughest hurdle for the project has been the simmering tension between B.C. First Nations and the federal government.
Unlike the rest of Canada, most First Nations in the westernmost province never signed treaties with the Crown. Decades of treaty negotiations have largely gone nowhere and aboriginal rights have been left to the courts.
Before Enbridge ever filed its application for the pipeline, Ottawa made the decision to let the joint review by the National Energy Board and Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency stand for its duty to consult with First Nations.
"The federal government would not support a process for aboriginal consultation separate from the (joint review panel) process…," said an internal Aboriginal Consultation Plan obtained by The Canadian Press using an Access to Information request.
That didn't go well.
"We're treated as a stakeholder in this process," Carrie Henchitt, a lawyer for the Heiltsuk Nation, said as the panel hearings became increasingly adversarial earlier this year. "We are not just stakeholders. We have specific rights very different from other interest groups."
Many aboriginal groups opposed to the pipeline refused to take part in the review. Several indicated they were preparing court action should the project get the nod.
The political backlash was not limited to First Nations.
The Conservative government became defensive over oilpatch expansion and Oliver branded opponents as "foreign special interests groups" that threatened to "hijack our regulatory system to achieve their radical ideological agenda."
The government changed the rules to give cabinet the final say on approval and rewrote rules around waterways and environmental protections.
It wasn't until after the project was mired in controversy that Oliver announced rules that began to address some of the concerns around tanker and pipeline safety, and over liability in the event of a spill.
— With files from Dene Moore in Vancouver


text:
Congratulations! BRADEN BAER
Braden's "Blood-Mid" took the idea of a shoe colorway and went outside the box of traditional thinking and created something that we felt deserved the grand prize, relieving his Mom from having to buy skate shoes for a year.
Runner-up: Stephen Williams
Stephen also, had some very interesting colorways that deserved a mention on the site. His ability to experiment with some different patterns caught our eye and earned him a spot for second place.


text:
Former CBS news correspondent and Arizona State University journalism professor Ben Silver has died. He was 85.
The university says he died Wednesday from complications of Parkinson's disease at his home in St. Louis Park, Minn.
Silver was a CBS national correspondent in the 1960s and covered race riots, school integration and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy's accident at Chappaquiddick.
Silver worked at WCKT-TV in Miami from 1957 to 1966, reporting from the Soviet Union and Latin America. He won a Peabody Award in 1960 for his coverage of Latin America.
He began teaching at ASU in 1972 and continued to file CBS reports for several years. He retired in 1990.
He is survived by his wife, six children and 11 grandchildren. Services will be held Sunday in Minneapolis.


text: Nicodemus in Easton's Bible Dictionary the people is victor, a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin. He is first noticed as visiting Jesus by night (John 3:1-21) for the purpose of learning more of his doctrines, which our Lord then unfolded to him, giving prominence to the necessity of being "born again." He is next met with in the Sanhedrin (7:50-52), where he protested against the course they were taking in plotting against Christ. Once more he is mentioned as taking part in the preparation for the anointing and burial of the body of Christ (John 19:39). We hear nothing more of him. There can be little doubt that he became a true disciple. Read More


text:
For some weeks now, I've been working on adding an optimizer pass to Rakudo and implementing an initial set of optimizations. The work has been taking place in a branch, which I'm happy to have just merged into our main development branch. This means that the optimizer will be included in the October release! :-) In this post, I want to talk a little about what the optimizer can do so far.
When Optimization Happens
When you feed a Perl 6 program to Rakudo, it munches its way through your code, simultaneously parsing it and building an AST for the executable bits, and a bunch of objects that represent the declarative bits. These are in various kinds of relationship; a code object knows about the bit of as-yet uncompiled AST that corresponds to its body (which it needs to go and compile just in time should it get called at BEGIN time), and the AST has references to declarative objects (types, subs, constants). Normally, the next step is to turn this AST into intermediate code for the target VM (so for Parrot, that's PIR). The optimizer nudges its way in between the two: it gets to see the fully constructed AST for the compilation unit, as well as all of the declarative objects. It can twiddle with either before we go ahead and finish the compilation process. This means that the optimizer gets to consider anything that took place at BEGIN and CHECK time also.
Using The Optimizer
The optimizer has three levels. The default level is 2. This is "optimizations we're pretty comfortable with having on by default". It's possible to pass –optimize=3, in which case we'll throw everything we've got at your program. If it breaks as a result, please tell us by filing an RT ticket; this is the pool of candidate optimizations to make it into group 2. After an optimization has had a while at level 2, combined with a happy and trouble-free history, we'll promote it into level 1. Using –optimize=1 at the moment gets you pretty much nothing – the analysis but no transformations. In the long run, it should get you just the optimizations we feel are really safe, so you won't lose everything if you need to switch down from –optimize=2 for some reason. Our goal is that you should never have to do that, of course. However, it's good to provide options. My thanks go to pmichaud++ for suggesting this scheme.
Compile Time Type Checking of Sub Arguments
One thing the optimizer can do is consider the arguments that will be passed to a subroutine. If it has sufficient type information about those arguments, it may be able to determine that the call will always be successful. In this case, it can flag to the binder that it need never do the type checks at run time. This one can actually help untyped programs too. Since the default argument type is Any, if you pass a parameter of one subroutine as an argument to another, it can know that this would never be a junction, so it never has to do the junction fail-over checks.
Compile Time Multiple Dispatch Resolution
While the multiple dispatch cache current Rakudo has is by some margin the best it has ever had in terms of lookup performance, it still implies work at run time. Given enough information about the types of the arguments is present, the optimizer is able to resolve some multiple dispatches at compile time, by working out cases where the dispatch must always lead to a certain candidate getting invoked. Of course, how well it can do this depends on the type information it has to hand and the nature of the candidates. This is a double saving: we don't have to do the multiple dispatch, and we don't have to do the type checks in the binding of the chosen candidate either.
Basic Inlining
In some (currently very constrained) cases, if we know what code is going to be called at compile time, and we know that the types of arguments being passed are all OK, we can avoid making the call altogether and just inline the body of the subroutine right into the caller. Of course, this is only beneficial in the case where the work the subroutine does is dominated by the overhead of calling it, and there are some cases where inlining is impossible to do without causing semantic differences. For now, the focus has been on doing enough to be able to inline various of the setting built-ins, but it's in no way restricted to just doing that. With time, the inline analysis will be made much smarter and more capable.
Native Operators
As part of getting the optimizer in place, moritz++ and I have also worked on native operators (that is, operators that operate on native types). This boils down to extra multiple dispatch candidates for various operators, in order to handle the natively typed case. However, something really nice happens here: because you always have to explicitly declare when you are using native types, we always have enough type information to inline them. Put another way, the native operator multis we've declared in the setting will always be inlined.
We've some way to go on this yet. However, this does already mean that there are some nice performance wins to be had by using native types in your program (int and num) where it makes sense to do so.
As an example, with –optimize=3 (the maximum optimization level, not the default one), we can compare:
my $i = 0; while $i < 10000000 { $i = $i + 1 }; say $i
my int $i = 0; while $i < 10000000 { $i = $i + 1 }; say $i
On my box, the latter typed version completes in 4.17 seconds, as opposed to the untyped version, which crawls in at 33.13 (so, a factor of 8 performance gain). If you're curious how this leaves us stacking up against Perl 5, on my box it does:
my $i = 0; while ($i < 10000000) { $i = $i + 1 }; say $i
In 0.746 seconds. This means that, with type information provided and for this one benchmark, Rakudo can get within a factor of six of Perl 5 – and the optimizer still has some way to go yet on this benchmark. (Do not read any more into this. This performance factor is certainly not generally true of Rakudo at the moment.)
We'll be continuing to work on native operators in the weeks and months ahead.
Immediate Block Inlining
We've had this in NQP for a while, but now Rakudo has it too. Where appropriate, we can now flatten simple immediate blocks (such as the bodies of while loops) into the containing block. This happens when they don't require a new lexical scope (that is, when they don't declare any lexicals).
That Could Never Work!
There's another nice fallout of the analysis that the optimizer does: as well as proving dispatches that will always work out at compile time, it can also identify some that could never possibly work. The simplest case is calling an undeclared routine, something that STD has detected for a while. However, Rakudo goes a bit further. For example, suppose you have this program:
sub foo($x) { say $x } foo()
This will now fail at compile time:
CHECK FAILED: Calling 'foo' will never work with no arguments (line 2) Expected: :(Any $x)
It can also catch some simple cases of type errors. For example:
sub foo(Str $s) { say $s } foo(42)
Will also fail at compile time:
CHECK FAILED: Calling 'foo' will never work with argument types (int) (line 2) Expected: :(Str $s)
It can handle some basic cases of this with multiple dispatch too.
Propagating Type Information
If we know what routine we're calling at compile time, we can take the declared return type of it and use it in further analysis. To give an example of how this aids failure analysis, consider the program:
sub foo() returns Int { 42 } sub bar(Str $s) { say $s } bar(foo())
This inevitable failure is detected at compile time now:
CHECK FAILED: Calling 'bar' will never work with argument types (Int) (line 3) Expected: :(Str $s)
The real purpose of this is for inlining and compile time multi-dispatch resolution though; otherwise, we could never fully inline complex expressions like $x + $y * $z.
Optimizing The Setting
Since we have loads of tests for the core setting (many of the spectests cover it), we compile it with –optimize=3. This means that a bunch of the built-ins will now perform better. We'll doubtless be taking advantage of native types and other optimizations to further improve the built-ins.
Gradual Typing
Many of these optimizations are a consequence of Perl 6 being a gradually typed language. You don't have to use types, but when you do, we make use of them to generate better code and catch more errors for you at compile time. After quite a while just talking about these possible wins, it's nice to actually have some of them implemented. :-)
The Future
Of course, this is just the start of the work – over the coming weeks and months, we should gain plenty of other optimizations. Some will focus on type-driven optimizations, others will not depend on this. And we'll probably catch more of thsoe inevitable run time failures at compile time too. In the meantime, enjoy what we have so far. :-)


text:
Private Ghost Tour (Jennie Wade House or Haunted Orphanage) on 7/15/21 @ 5:30 PM on 07/15/2021
We are sorry. Online registration for this event has closed.
Did you ever want an exclusive private ghost tour of a truly haunted house?
(Orphanage) Pass through the gift shop at Ghostly Images and begin your tour of the Haunted Orphanage where you will be introduced to the story of the National Soldiers Orphanage Homestead. You guide will escort you down the original wooden stairs to the same dingy, dark dungeon where a cruel headmistress chained children to stone walls when they misbehaved. You will hear about the appalling treatment of the young children in her charge, treatments that some say caused their spirits to linger throughout the building for over 150 years.
(Jennie Wade House) Enter the same doorway through which a bullet passed on July 3rd, 1863, killing young Jennie Wade and making her the only civilian to be killed during the battle of Gettysburg. The ghostly tales to be told in this house have been recorded in numerous books and television specials. Come see for yourself why this humble home has been featured on Travel Channel's list of the most haunted houses.
- Tours begin from the Ghostly Images gift shop where guests will meet their guide.
- Tour lasts approximately 75 minutes with most of the time spent INSIDE either the Orphanage or the Jennie Wade House.
- Price is $90 for up to 6 people. (Maximum group size of 8 ($12 per Adult above 6)
Please let us know in the Note section which building you would like to tour, Orphanage or the Jennie Wade House and how many in your party.
Gratuities are appreciated.


text:
John V
John V (John Palaeologus)pāl˝ēŏl´əgəs [key], 1332–91, Byzantine emperor (1341–91), son and successor of Andronicus III. Forced to fight John VI (John Cantacuzene), who usurped the throne during his minority, he came into power in 1354. In his reign the Ottoman Turks took Adrianople and Philippolis, conquered Serbia, and exacted tribute from the emperor. John vainly tried to heal the schism between East and West in order to secure Western aid against the Turks. He professed (1369) the Roman Catholic faith at Rome; while returning to Constantinople he was briefly imprisoned for debt in Venice. In 1371 he recognized the suzerainty of the Ottoman sultan Murad I. Deposed (1376) by his son Andronicus IV, he was restored in 1379. In 1390 his grandson, John VII, briefly usurped the throne. John V was succeeded by his son Manuel II.
The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed. Copyright © 2023, Columbia University Press. All rights reserved.
See more Encyclopedia articles on: Ancient History, Late Roman and Byzantine: Biographies


text:
Snakebitten at home
After being swept by the Wisconsin Timber Rattlers, it seems the West Michigan Whitecaps could be snakebitten at Fifth Third Ballpark. The 'Caps seemed to be on a roll, after sweeping the Lake County Captains on the road in Eastlake, Ohio. The T-Rats didn't return the favor, though, beating the 'Caps in three straight games. It seemed that West Michigan had a great chance to steal a victory on Saturday afternoon, but couldn't find the winning run and lost 3-2 in twelve innings. Eugenio Suarez had a good game at the plate, though, going 3-5 with a double and RBI. On another good note, 'Caps relief pitcher Nick Avila pitched over four scoreless innings to keep his team in the game. The winning pitcher for Wisconsin was Tommy Toledo, who had one of the best baseball names I've ever heard. The Tigers need to trade for this guy and put him on the Mud Hens roster immediately. The 7-9 Whitecaps now must take on the Beloit Snappers in a three game set starting this afternoon, and hope they can give their fans something to cheer about with a victory or two, or three.


text:
Here is an interesting splice of Moberg and satellite data. Blue is Moberg, grey is Moberg error bars, red is instrumental, all downloaded from the Nature SI; purple is satellite. At right is the post-1850 blow-up. You can see that the post-1980 satellite temperatures are high but not off the charts relative to Moberg's reconstruction.
To even contemplate use of Moberg, the Hockey Team has to rely entirely on the splice of CRU records, rather than satellite records. Warwick Hughes and others have expressed concerns about how CRU have handled urban heat island effects and other issues. There are some very interesting issues in SST temperatures on how adjustments have been done for change-over from measuring temperatures in buckets to engine inlets, which I'll post about some time.
A couple of years ago (before I had any notoriety), I asked Phil Jones for the data used in the UHI study published in Nature and relied upon by IPCC. Jones told me that it was on one of dozens of diskettes in his office and he couldn't find it. I didn't pursue the matter at the time. You may recall Phil Jones' response to Warwick Hughes' request for the underlying station data:
We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it.
Phil Jones' construction of temperature data sets has been financed by the U.S. Department of Energy. Whether the CRU data sets are right or wrong, they need to be audited. I don't see why the Hockey Team should be exempt from audit standards.


text:
10 Guaranteed Ways to Retire Rich
By Maryalene LaPonsie
Retiring comfortably — never mind wealthy — may seem out of reach to many people, given current savings rates. Consider that median savings accumulated by workers ages 51 through 60 years is $49,000, while the number for people ages 30 through 40 is $30,000, according to professional services firm Towers Watson.
Don't let the statistics scare you. With a little advance planning and self-discipline, you can have a golden nest egg at retirement. Here's how:
Rule 1: Spend less than you earn
The formula for retiring rich starts with you actually putting money in the bank. Social Security alone isn't enough to have you living the good life during your golden years.
Money Talks News founder Stacy Johnson recommends you spend only 90 percent of the money you make and sock away the remaining 10 percent.
If you have zero savings right now, concentrate on building up an emergency fund in a savings account first. Once your rainy-day fund is full, put that 10 percent you're not spending into a dedicated retirement fund.
If you're currently spending more than 90 percent of your income each month, you may want to read about how to save $1,000 by summer.
Rule 2: Start saving early
Thanks to the power of compounding interest, a little money saved now can go a long way at retirement time. But to get the most benefit, you'll want to start saving as early as possible.
Let's say you're 20 years old and can manage to put away only $100 a month into your retirement fund. Assuming you average 8 percent returns, you'll be closing in on having half a million dollars – $463,806 to be exact – by age 65. Even better, over that 45-year period, you'll only have invested $54,000 of your money to get all that cash in return.
If you wait until you're 40 to start saving $100 a month, and get that same rate of return, you'll put in $30,000 of your money and get $87,727 in return by age 65. Not bad, but wouldn't you rather have half a million?
Rule 3: If you start late, make up for lost time
Maybe you're 55 and think you've missed your window of opportunity to retire rich. Don't wave the white flag just yet!
The government allows those 50 or older at the end of the year to make catch-up contributions to their retirement funds. You can contribute an extra $6,000 to your workplace retirement program, such as a 401(k), for a total annual contribution of $24,000. IRA catch-up contributions are $1,000 for a total allowable contribution of $6,500 each year.
You might think there's no way you'd ever have $6,500, let alone $23,000, to invest in a single year, but you could be surprised at when and how you come into extra cash. You may benefit from a loved one's estate, downsize your home or sell a boat or other large toy that no longer fits your lifestyle. When you find yourself on the receiving end of a windfall, don't blow it on a vacation; put it in a retirement account if you want to retire rich.
Rule 4: Don't leave free money on the table
If someone tried to hand you $100, would you say no?
That's exactly what you're doing when you fail to take advantage of a 401(k) employer match. Your company is basically giving you free money with the only string being you need to pony up some of your own cash for the retirement fund too.
You won't get rich by passing up golden opportunities like this for extra cash. If your employer offers a 401(k) match, make sure you are taking full advantage of it.
Rule 5: Minimize your taxes
The rich stay rich, in part, because they're savvy enough not to let Uncle Sam take too much of their money.
When you're investing your retirement money, be sure to use tax-sheltered accounts such as IRAs and 401(k)'s whenever possible. In addition, be smart about which type of account you use.
Traditional retirement accounts let you invest money tax-free now and pay the piper once you make withdrawals in retirement. Meanwhile, Roth IRAs and Roth 401(k)'s tax you now and make the withdrawals tax-free.
You'll probably want to discuss with a financial adviser the best option for your particular situation, but generally, Roth accounts are preferable for younger investors. In theory, you should be making more when you're 65 than when you're 25. As a result, your tax rate now may be lower than the rate you'd pay at retirement. However, if you're within a few years of retirement, you may want to consider a traditional account to get the tax benefits now.
Rule 6: Take a little risk
You could put all your money in bonds and sleep well at night knowing you'll probably never lose any of your money. But with that approach, you're not going to retire a millionaire either.
Stocks and real estate are where the money is to be made, but then there is always the risk of a housing bubble bursting or the market crashing. Take heart, though, in knowing that stocks and real estate have historically appreciated in the long run.
Rule 7: Stay informed about your investments
Don't mistake taking a risk with being dumb.
A smart risk may be investing in an emerging market fund. A dumb move may be pouring your life savings into a speculative currency.
How do you know the difference? By researching available investments, weighing your options and selecting the amount of risk that works for your unique situation. For example, those nearing retirement age may want to minimize their level of risk, while recent college grads can be more daring because time is on their side.
For more help on investing, read Stacy's advice on how to open a mutual fund and how to select a good investment adviser.
Rule 8: Break free from the herd
When the stock market crashed a few years ago, too many people freaked out and sold their investments.
You know what? Those people took a bad situation and made it even worse. Many sold their investments right when the market was bottoming out, and then they missed the rebound.
The people who are going to retire rich are those who snatched up stocks at bargain-basement prices in 2009 and then saw their value climb by double digits in the following years. Same thing goes with the housing market. When the bubble burst, the smart people were the ones who were buying houses, not selling.
It's easy to follow the herd, but if you want to be rich, you need to keep a cool head and make rational money decisions even in the midst of a crisis.
Rule 9: Work longer
Or at least wait to file for Social Security. While you can file for Social Security benefits as early as age 62, you'll get a lot more money if you wait until you're 70.
Once you hit your full retirement age, you can get an 8 percent bump in your benefits for every year you wait to start receiving payments. However, you'll want to file by age 70 because there is no benefit to waiting longer than that.
You may be worried you'll have one foot in the grave at age 70, but don't fret. According to Social Security actuarial data, at age 70, you should still have an average of 14 to 16 years left to suck all the marrow out of life.
Rule 10: Maximize your income potential
Finally, if you want to retire rich, you need to maximize your earnings. That means no more settling for a dead-end job that pays pennies.
Look for ways to increase your income, which can, in turn, increase the amount of money you are saving for retirement. Consider these options:
Does your current field offer some form of credentialing that could increase your opportunities for a raise or a transfer to a higher-paying position?
Is there someone in your workplace who could serve as a mentor and help advance your career?
Are you eligible for one of the government-funded workforce development training programs?
Did you start a college program and never finish it? Will those credits transfer?
Could you use an online degree program or vocational classes through a community college to earn a degree or upgrade your skills?
Regardless of which option you choose, don't fall into the student loan trap. If you do decide to go back to school, look for ways to make college affordable and try to pay as you go rather than going into debt.
Retiring rich may sound like something reserved for the one-percenters, but by making these smart money moves, you too can have plenty of cash to carry you through your golden years.


text:
Add style to your Jeep? without breaking the bank! Omix Stainless Steel & Black Powder Coat accessories are high-quality products that are reasonably priced. And easy to care for too! The Stainless Steel requires only an occasional waxing to keep their mirror-like shine. Accessories include all mounting hardware.
We're working on getting more reviews for this product. In the meantime, here's what people are saying about 4WD
Hello, can you tell me if this gauge cover have holes for mounting or if it is adhesive, thanks.
Asked by frenchjeepers from France on
Hello! This gauge cover uses double sided tape to mount to the dash.
Answered by Aaron S. from France on
Rugged Ridge Grab Bars
Rugged Ridge Grab Handles
Rugged Ridge Roll Bar Cover Kits
Smittybilt Trail Gear Bags
Rugged Ridge Glove Box Door
Rugged Ridge was established in 2005 by the company Omix-ADA to focus on innovative aftermarket Jeep accessories. Many of Rugged Ridge's recent designs are so innovative they have been patented. This includes their floor liners, snorkel and XHD Modular Bumpers. Since 2005 Rugged Ridge has developed and manufactured over 3,000 kinds of Jeep related products. All Rugged Ridge Jeep accessories are trail rated. The Omix-ADA founder came from a family that owned a small Jeep dealership. It was the founder's dream from a young age to own a company that made accessories for Jeeps. The founder manifested the dream in 1992. Shop Rugged Ridge Now
Join our mailing list to receive information on new products, special events, discounts and more!


text:
There are three big festivals (or matsuri) in Kyoto: Gion, Jidai and Aoi. I never saw the Aoi matsuri when I lived here because after seeing the Gion and Jidai ones I learned that it was all the same thing over and over again and so not worth the crowds. However as we were here and the Aoi matsuri was on, it felt like a waste not to attend.
The crowds were terrible though.


text: The Ion Channel Web Page has just undergone a major update. Recent article summaries have been added, a clickable map of the Shaker K+ channel pore is being developed, the reference list has been updated to include more recent articles as well as a search utility. These are just a few of the changes and the page still has links to leading researchers in the ion channel field, a section exploring ion channel toxins, human Kv channel gene sequences as well as several other resources. The URL for this site is: http://qlink.queensu.ca/~4jch3/ Sincerely, --------------------------------------------------------------------------- J. Christian Hesketh Queen's University - Kingston, Canada Phone (613) 531-8048 e-mail: 4jch3 at qlink.queensu.ca Web Page (Research in Ion Channels): http://qlink.queensu.ca/~4jch3 -Current research in ion channels with a biophysical perspective


text:
By Will Oremus
FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski takes a stand on behalf of common sense.
Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
Based on no evidence whatsoever, the Federal Aviation Administration for years has required airplane passengers to turn off all electronic devices during takeoff and landing. Let the record show that the long list of people who think this is stupid now includes the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, Julius Genachowski.
The Hill's Jennifer Martinez obtained a letter that Genachowski sent on Thursday to Michael Huerta, acting administrator of the FAA, urging him to at least allow passengers to keep using their Kindles and iPads. (The FAA is currently reviewing its policies on electronic devices, though it preemptively announced that it would not consider allowing voice communications.) The step to allow tablets seems all the more common-sensical given that pilots themselves now use iPads as flight manuals. Here's how Genachowski's letter begins, according to a copy obtained by the New York Times' Nick Bilton:
Dear Administrator Huerta:
I write to urge the FAA to enable greater use of tablets, e-readers, and other portable electronic devices during flight, consistent with public safety. I support the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) initiative to review the polices, guidance, and procedures regarding the use of such devices.
This review comes at a time of tremendous innovation, as mobile devices are increasingly interwoven in our daily lives. They empower people to stay informed and connected with friends and family, and they enable both large and small businesses to be more productive and efficient, helping drive economic growth and boost U.S. competitiveness.
There! You see? This policy isn't just annoying, it's killing our economy. Now can we change the stupid rule?
Source: Slate