One of the things I don't like about setting posts up to publish automatically while I'm on vacation is that I don't get a chance to respond to comments until well after the post has dropped off the radar. I love getting comments, and quite often the discussion engendered by the post is just as engaging as the post itself. In that vein, I'd like to respond to some comments left in my absence last week...
In my Don't Get "Clip'd" post, our good friend anonymous mentions that:
In my post about Asperger's and insurance, Jake (formerly Riposte3) makes the point that:
wolfwalker boils it down to the salient point:
RW sums it up beautifully in one paragraph:
In my Gunnie Gifts post, there were a lot of great suggestions, with the vast majority leaning towards a custom or show 1911 or similar "BBQ" gun. The originator of the post, West, By God, did leave one comment I had to address:
On my How's That Vacation Shaping Up post, keens had a good point:
insane dedicated fitness fanatic...
There were a LOT of good comments on my Beginner Bikes post.
Mule Breath makes an excellent point that I wish I'd addressed:
Sailorcurt had a minor disagreement over one of my choices:
Tim had another point worth repeating:
Strings brings up an excellent point against small bikes:
One last thing on this - I'd like to expand a bit on the "open house" idea. I've been to open houses hosted by Harley Davidson dealers, Honda dealers, Kawasaki dealers, and others. I've had the chance to ride Road Kings, Fat Boys, Goldwings, Valkyries, and Ninjas. There is no better way than to decide if a bike is right for you than to get on one and ride it. Plain and simple. If you can narrow it down to a particular brand, pick a dealership nearby and wait for an open house (usually late spring/early summer). Get on a demo bike and ride it...
My post about guns for the new shooter to avoid seemed to have struck a chord, with many folks offering their opinions on bad guns, bad guns they've owned, poor experiences with certain brands, etc. It seems like everyone has a favorite gun - and a least favorite gun to go with it.
I have to comment on DaddyBear's comment:
Kim made me chuckle:
Deagles (Desert Eagles), Ermas, Sig Skeeters, and Mosin Nagants seem to have a dedicate following of not-likers. I can't comment on the Deagle or the Erma, as I've never even shot one, but I've shot Lissa's Skeeter and found it to be a little on the finicky side but very accurate. As for the M/N, well, it is most certainly NOT a gun for a new shooter...
My tribute to Ted Kennedy got some of the best laffs.
In my Don't Get "Clip'd" post, our good friend anonymous mentions that:
The "Law Enforcement" stamp has no legal weight whatsoever. It's often an indication of post-ban status, but it's not automatic.While this may very well be technically correct, in that magazines made prior to September of 1994 might be marked thusly, it swaps the onus from the state to prove that the magazines are not pre-ban to the owner to prove that they are. If there's a date code on the magazines, or a wrapper with a date on it, that's one thing, but without concrete evidence that the magazine with the LEO stamp really does pre-date the ban, I'd pass on it.
In my post about Asperger's and insurance, Jake (formerly Riposte3) makes the point that:
Autism absolutely should be covered by insurance (if similar issues are covered), at least in it's more severe forms. Without treatment autistics are generally effectively non-functional, and depend on others or society for care for the rest of their lives. With treatment, they can be at least mostly, if not completely, functional and independent. I also think the more mild forms should be covered, for similar reasons. The better someone is at functioning in society, the less they will require treatment and care in the long run.Which is one of the points I had been grasping for but couldn't quite articulate. The most important part, from an insurance standpoint, is that they should cover treatment for autism if other behavioral issues are covered; the second being that treatment given early prevents a lot of other, more costly care down the road. It's akin to not paying for birth control, but paying for pre-natal visits, childbirth, etc.
wolfwalker boils it down to the salient point:
That said, however, I'm not at all surprised that insurance companies don't cover autism. Autism is a bitch for insurance companies, because it's a guaranteed payout, and probably a big one at that. Remember, they aren't charities. They're in business to make money. Their margins are thin as it is. A severely autistic person can require hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of care over his or her life. It doesn't take very many such cases to take a big bite out of those thin profit margins.It's all about the Benjamins, of course. Behavioral therapy and one-on-one counseling add up, and the last thing insurance companies want is a disease with a large occurrence rate - as RW tells us, the numbers may be as high as 1 in 100 with some form of autism.
RW sums it up beautifully in one paragraph:
I'm not all that up to date on asperger's, but I get asked about autism a lot. Basically, if you have a kid that (1) doesn't/can't communicate; (2) hums incessantly, as in "pretty much all the time"; (3) shakes their hands over and over and over and over....chances are pretty good that you should seek the advice of an expert, as those are the tell-tale signs. There are others, but those stick out. One of them can be a quirk. Two...reach out, immediately. Early intervention can equal recovery. My son is a walking example.A generation ago, chances are that someone with these types of behaviors would either have been institutionalized or marginalized, left by the wayside as someone who couldn't communicate. Now, with treatment, we're seeing that this isn't the case, that people that suffer from this spectrum of disorder can be "mainstream" just like the rest of us (well, maybe not foul-mouthed shaved head bikers...)
In my Gunnie Gifts post, there were a lot of great suggestions, with the vast majority leaning towards a custom or show 1911 or similar "BBQ" gun. The originator of the post, West, By God, did leave one comment I had to address:
oooh. or a rhino in .357 just to be weird and contrary. http://chiappafirearms.com/products/75No. NONONONONONONONONONOnonononononononono. We had the opportunity to check these out at the NRA convention in Charlotte, and unless you like odd, hard-to-find accessories and parts for guns that do what other guns do better for half the price steer clear of the Chiappas. Especially since the trigger pull on all three guns I tried felt like pulling a pound of rocks over rough sandpaper...
On my How's That Vacation Shaping Up post, keens had a good point:
on my vacation trip, i failed to shape up because my mind was set to just relax and have fun..but then i should give it a try on the vacation trip i'll haveThere's a good deal of truth to that in and of itself; that a vacation is good for both mental and physical relaxation. My point for the post was that there are plenty of options available for the
There were a LOT of good comments on my Beginner Bikes post.
Mule Breath makes an excellent point that I wish I'd addressed:
I'd also emphasize boots, gloves and helments. You wisely mentioned the MSF safety course, which insists on "no skin below the chin" for trainees.This. I cannot stress this enough for a beginner rider. Get a good, solid, leather jacket or composite; ideally leather lowers or Draggin' Jeans; solid, heavy gloves; and dedicated motorcycling boots - they should at least cover the ankle, and steel toe boots are excellent for helping with recalcitrant shifters.
Sailorcurt had a minor disagreement over one of my choices:
I absolutely don't recommend a "crotch rocket" style bike for beginners, even the 250cc ones. Contrary to the opinion of every 16 year old boy on the planet, that style of bike is not for beginners IMHO.I specifically highlighted the Kawasaki Ninja 500 because it's not exactly a sportbike - more along the lines of a standard with a little extra. I still feel that the lighter weight of the sport-type bike is an asset for a beginner rider - rather than hefting around a 700 pound cruiser, it's a 350 pound sportbike - but his point is well-taken. The sportbike seating and handling are not for beginners.
Tim had another point worth repeating:
Try to avoid stuff pre-1982 or so because of the breaker point ignition and general deterioration of parts like brake hoses and cables.I had a '82 Honda Magna V45 for my second bike, and one of the reasons I got rid of it was that parts were getting harder and harder to find. Older bikes will be cheaper and you won't mind a drop or a scuff here and there, but you don't want to be out of commission for two months because the part your bike needs is only available via yak from North Yemen.
Strings brings up an excellent point against small bikes:
Reason I advise something "mid sized": defensive driving. Quite often (IME), your only defense while riding is in your left hand: if the bike doesn't have the power to get up and haul a bit, you stand a very good chance of getting run over. That said...Small bike means less power, less power means less ability to get out of the way in the event of an emergency. Good point, Strings. Obviously, what's "midsized" to a 250 pound, 6' 3" tall man is going to differ from what "midsized" looks like to a 130 pound, 5' 4" woman (and I differentiate genders because body types do matter when choosing a bike).
One last thing on this - I'd like to expand a bit on the "open house" idea. I've been to open houses hosted by Harley Davidson dealers, Honda dealers, Kawasaki dealers, and others. I've had the chance to ride Road Kings, Fat Boys, Goldwings, Valkyries, and Ninjas. There is no better way than to decide if a bike is right for you than to get on one and ride it. Plain and simple. If you can narrow it down to a particular brand, pick a dealership nearby and wait for an open house (usually late spring/early summer). Get on a demo bike and ride it...
My post about guns for the new shooter to avoid seemed to have struck a chord, with many folks offering their opinions on bad guns, bad guns they've owned, poor experiences with certain brands, etc. It seems like everyone has a favorite gun - and a least favorite gun to go with it.
I have to comment on DaddyBear's comment:
I'd also say don't get an AR-15 for your first gun. They're complicated, can be very finicky about ammo, and lead to the dark side of mall-ninja.Heh, heh, and heh. The first time I disassembled my Bushmaster I remember thinking that having an engineering degree would come in handy. And then I ran JSPs through it and found out just how finicky it could be. Then it sprung the piston detente and jammed things up but good. And then, lastly, I discovered rails and the dark side...
Kim made me chuckle:
Ruger Security Six. Awkward grip angle, turns in the hand when fired, definitely not a newbie gun.My first gun was a Security Six. Now, granted, it came with aftermarket grips that I replaced several times until I came across the Hogue monogrips, so I can't comment on the grip angle. And I have the 6" barrel, which pretty much negates any turning. It's not a horrible first gun, in that stoked with mild .38 Specials it's almost as pleasant to shoot as a .22LR.
Deagles (Desert Eagles), Ermas, Sig Skeeters, and Mosin Nagants seem to have a dedicate following of not-likers. I can't comment on the Deagle or the Erma, as I've never even shot one, but I've shot Lissa's Skeeter and found it to be a little on the finicky side but very accurate. As for the M/N, well, it is most certainly NOT a gun for a new shooter...
My tribute to Ted Kennedy got some of the best laffs.
Unc had the line of the day with this:
Congrats, ted. One year sober.Heh.
Stingray used my alternate ending to that phrase:
"If you can't say something nice, come sit over here by me."And Heath has a point:
I've also never understood the taboo of "speaking ill of the dead". If a person was a rotten bastard in life, why go out of the way to be courteous and respectful to their hated memory ???True dat.
So there's the comments I missed last week that I wanted to highlight. I really enjoy reading the comments to my posts (especially since a good chunk of the time y'all are smarter than the chimp making the post anyways), and I certainly want to encourage more commenting. I don't always get a chance to respond to comments, but when I miss a bunch of them I want to make amends.
Never let a little thing like a vacation get in the way of a good comment!
That is all.
No comments:
Post a Comment