Woldan

Hmm? in a cartoon evil kinda way like him? Nah, the ''charming but misunderstood rebel'' kind of way.

Thats certainly weird. And awesome. So Nissan is returning to the endurance racing (12 and 24 hour ALMS series) with a LMP1. Whats weird is the car has a front engine and front wheel drive, its pretty much an endurance race car in reverse. They claim its silly fast on the straights (beyond 350 km/h) and I bet it is, the engine layout allows a very low drag design and the underfloor diffuser can be shaped more efficiently because there is not a huge engine sitting on it. The combustion engine drives the front wheels, flywheel KERS can power front and/or rear wheels. With combustion engine and KERS activated at the same time it is supposed to generate in excess of 1500 horsepower. Just as a reminder, the last 60 years all the 24 hour races were won with RWD mid engine cars. Its ugly, but in racing beauty lies in in its function. I already like it.

Last night I dreamed of Putin. When he started talking to me I stabbed him in the stomach with a screwdriver and killed him. 0__o Which is strange, I actually like him.

Maybe this is such a common occurrence that only the real dramatic cases make it into the news? I really can't say anything about that. I recall a couple of cases where Police -in my country- had to use their guns to stop an attacker. One with a crazed woman attacking 2 police officers with a butchers knife, she was shot 7 or 9 times and still managed to injure a female officer. She survived. I vaguely recall several similar incidents but I'd have to look for sources to refresh my memory.

Exactly. You were the one dead set (no pun intended) on killing in a self defense scenario, not me. I simply told you what that immature and ill-thought through statement means in real life. I can quote you once more if you like but I'm not sure if you understand your ramblings yourself. That just shows how little you know about terminal ballistics, head wounds from handgun calibers are survivable with immediate medical care, there are many cases where the victim survived a complete pass through through the brain. I could explain how bullets work when hitting soft tissue and everything about permanent plus temporary cavity, secondary projectiles, yawing, hydrostatic shock, velocity, jacket separations, bullet design and so on, but that would be a waste of time for me. Also, read the statistic I posted (if you can), most of the calibers have a 30% lethality ratio on torso and head hits. Most people only having experience with movies and video games don't know anything about terminal ballistics and the human body, it can be really hard to kill somebody with a handgun. People think of handguns as lethal death rays, which is far from the truth. Those usually also believe you can choke somebody to death in 60 seconds like they do in movies.

No, its actually you who is changing his opinion. Its amazing you still don't get it and that you're now trying to twist what I wrote around. Read it ten more times: ''You shoot until the threat does not pose any danger anymore.'' You want, however, kill anyone attacking you for some reason which does not make any sense. Killing somebody can be the result of your self defense but it cannot be your goal in self defense. Get it now? I'll give you a practical example what that means, maybe you get it that way: Somebody attacks you with a knife, you pull out your gun and shoot till the threat is down and does not attack anymore. You are safe, the attack has been repelled, you have defended yourself, everything else is secondary. Now according to your logic if the attacker would survive even though he clearly does not pose any danger anymore since he is gutshot writhing on the floor in pain you'd want to shoot him on the ground till he is dead since you want to kill him. This has nothing to do with self defense. You know how the effectiveness of self defense calibers is rated? In STOPPING power, not killing power. Says it all, doesn't it? I never said such thing. I give you 1 point for trying though. Remember, 80% of the people shot with service pistols survive because pistols are very weak. If you shoot to kill you better be prepared to execute the person with multiple point blank head shots, and thats exaggerated self defense. When pulling a gun you have to be aware of the fact that this can result in the death of a person. And here is incapacitation chart for popular handgun calibers: See the difference in incapacitation and actual lethality? Shooting and stopping somebody without killing is as very likely outcome. I know if I had to defend myself in my home I'd do it the way as I described, if the target has stopped attacking me I have reached my goal of keeping myself safe. No need to continue shooting if it has not resulted in the immediate death of my attacker. (However, I'm using a shotgun with 1 1/4 ounce soft lead magnum foster slugs so... )

*sigh* Thats exactly what I've been saying all along, you were the guy who said you want to kill the attacker which does not make any sense in the context of self defense and indicates that you might have some problems. In a self defense scenario you shoot until the attacker does not pose a threat anymore, no more no less.

Wrong. You shoot until you are safe. Anything else is secondary. Thats exactly what I wrote. You are safe when the attacker does not pose any danger anymore. This does not have anything to do with the attacker surviving - or not. I don't get why you are insisting that you have to kill the attacker to be safe, even if you can repel the attack and be safe without having made lethal shots. Shoot until the threat is gone, this can be lethal but its doesn't have to be. Even the police is trained to shoot till they're safe, not till the attacker is a flatline. I guess you're the kind of person who'd curb-stomp somebody who is unconscious or surrendering just to be safe? Again, in the real world such attitude will make you go to prison for a looong time.

You shoot center mass until the threat does not pose any danger anymore, anything else is secondary. Sometimes thats lethal for the attacker, sometimes it isn't. Some people will stop attacking you after receiving a non lethal hit because of pain and shock, others will soak up a magazine till they stop attacking you and die. Shooting until someone is dead has nothing to do with self defense because your goal is to end the attack, not to end someones life. Saying ''I'll kill anyone who attacks me'' does not make any sense in the context of self defense. And just for your information, 80% of the people shot with service pistols survive because pistols are very weak. If you want to kill that person you'd probably have to execute the attacker point blank which is homicide or exaggerated self defense, even under those circumstances. Telling the jury that you wanted to kill the attacker wouldn't be all that smart either, even if your life was at stake at some point.

Thank you. I just hope my soon to be dog will have a long and healthy life. My neighbors dogs were denied from such a fate, he had three dogs and all faded away in a matter of three years from strange illnesses. (Blood poisoning and strange bone infections, even the docs were puzzled). I knew those dogs, played with them and it hurts to know they suffered so much. But here I am already jinxing everything. In any case, I'll be extra careful and watchful.

Any thoughts on the name? Yes, when I first tried to think of a name ''Jackie'' immediately popped into my head. I like it a lot.

If you shoot somebody with the intention of killing you're killer, even if said person is attacking you. In a self defense scenario you shoot till the threat is incapable of continuing the assault. Incapacitation is the goal, not ending someones life.

Talked with a dog breeder, if all goes to plan I'll get a brown or black female Doberman puppy end of next month. Female because after an extensive conversation I found out I like the character of females of that specific breed a little more. Can't wait.

By the gods, Turrican 2! I don't know how many hours I spent on playing this game on my Amiga when I was a kid, its etched into my brain. That was one of the few games that was really cool. Another gem from a bygone era:

You're welcome. I've been a fan of Solar Fields since......forever.

I prefer the Mothman. Just curious, are there any big bridges in the vicinity?

Its because my scope is silver white, not black, isn't it? You goddamn racist. Its silver because I wanted to put it onto a stainless steel rifle but had to scrap that plan. Put it onto this rifle instead, which gives it kind of a unique look. Nobody puts a silver scope on a blued rifle because it looks...odd. Agent 47?

If you turn the 40mm scope down to 5 power it has a 8mm exit pupil, the max for the human eye is about 7 so its about as bright as a scope can make it without NV. Its amazing what a good scope with 98% light transmission and a 7mm exit pupil can do, its like a mini night vision device. So at 5 power the scope should make the brightest picture while the ''twilight factor'' gives it a max range of 140 meters for providing a clear picture. (not taking its quality into account. ) I'm curious about the signs & tracks. In any case, a 300 with 220 grainers is good bear medicine. Well, medicine against anything else that crawls or walks. What I did today: fittingly, I just bought Butler Creek flip covers for my Weaver 3-10x40:

Well, report back about how it worked out for you in a couple of months or so, I'm too much of a wuss to change my ways in this area. For me its like letting down my guard, and this world is an merciless bastard.

Have you ever wanted to shoot a car door with silly putty that travels well above the speed of sound? Or chewing gum? No? But you still got to watch this:

Hm, whenever I shot somebody with a silenced weapon enemies in the vicinity immediately went into an alarmed/search mode for half a minute or so Also the bright lighting may be your gamma setting, I set gamma lower than recommended so a lot of times I had to use night vision to see where I was going. If it was so bright that you could navigate in the shadows without any kind of help from your NV gamma was set too high. Walking in guns blazing was realtively easy because the AI's aim was not very good even at the highest difficulty setting, if you had halfway decent cover sticking your had out shoot others in the scull was really easy, especially at long ranges. It took waaaay more effort to do half as much damage in stealth mode. (as it should) The whispering in the Nazi prison was dumb though.

Some of the characters were pretty awful I agree, I especially loathed Anna. But, Pavel was a pretty good antagonist for a survival FPS game. Stealth was exploitable but way harder than simply going in guns blazing and head-shooting everyone. Heck, with the assault rifles you were nearly invincible. Get behind cover and head-shoot everyone.- Its like a hammerhead game. Sneaking past 15 guards who carry flash lights / head lamps and finding alternative routes and avoiding nearly invisible traps was fun. Not nearly as much fun as stealth in the Thief games but fun.