Gromnir

mexico's real progress: http://www.theworlds50best.com/list/1-50-winners/Quintonil http://www.theworlds50best.com/list/1-50-winners/Pujol http://www.theworlds50best.com/list/1-50-winners/Biko three in the top 50 and the cost to dine at any o' the three is ~$65. alinea in chicago set us back $275. ryugin in tokyo cost us $300. didn't pay for our own meals at estela (ny), saison (san francisco) or blue hill at stone barns (sleepy hollow... well, almost sleepy hollow), but am suspecting all were in the $300 range. mexico city is gonna be getting a visit the next time we go to ixtapa. HA! Good Fun! ps blue hill were... weird. am pretty sure that one o' the courses were tree moss and some kinda wild mushroom. were some nice food overall, but also some crazy.

ryan reynolds did do a spot on carol milford. other than the opening credits, which were amusing and clever, am admitting that the first fifteen minutes o' the movie were robbing from us all hope for the rest of the movie. mr. reynolds were doing his usual schtick, but given the comic book source material and the nature o' the deadpool character, the schtick were predictably exaggerated. it were too much to be funny? dunno. regardless, we were't conflicted or ambivalent 'bout deadpool-- we disliked deadpool. Deadpool: LOOK! Im a teenage girl, I'd rather be anywhere than here! I'm all about long sullen silences, followed by mean comments, followed by more silence! So what's it gonna be, long sullen silence, or mean comment? Go on, take your pick. Negasonic Teenage Warhead: ...You got me in a box here. a bit before the aforementioned dialogue, Gromnir started to enjoy the movie. the "box" comment were the first time we genuine laughed, but weren't the last. by the end o' the movie, we were having an unabashedly fantabulous moviegoing experience. we did watch the movie at a virtual empty theatre, so we didn't have the benefit o' group catharsis. folks wanna laugh, particularly in a group, yes? as a human being, we admit that we still fall prey to that weird thrill-o'-the-crowd effect. getting caught up in the emotions o' the group is most noticeable to us at sporting events, but can feel it at movies and plays and spontaneous bottle throwing mobs. if we had watched deadpool in a theatre surrounded by comic book geeks who were already wanting to like the movie, am doubting it woulda' taken us so long to warm up to the film. if everybody else had been laughing, so too woulda' Gromnir, if only reflexive. were less than a dozen other patrons at our viewing o' deadpool. regardless, deadpool were an almost unique experience. is numerous flicks we like for first 15 minutes but ended up loathing by end credits. is only a handful o' movies that has done for us the reverse. HA! Good Fun!

In this sense, I think its an apt comparison simply because LOTR is the only real fantasy franchise created as a multi-part story (excluding science fantasy like Star Wars). Are there better fantasy films - sure. But CONAN THE BARBARIAN wasn't created with CONAN THE DESTROYER already planned; Harryhausen never planned out a continuity between his SINBAD films. fair enough, but one must admit that by limiting only to fantasy movies with genuine planned sequels, you is fishing in an extreme small pond. even star wars (episode 4) were not having a sequels greenlit at the time of its production. heck, lucas had only vague notions o' where to take a sequel and he made significant changes to his tentative plans. for instance, the emperor, an obviously pivotal character in the franchise, we envisioned by lucas during star wars writing as a puppet o' the military-industrial complex. lotr were actual unique in that all three movies were filmed consecutive w/o waiting for box office results o' the introductory title. HA! Good Fun!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnIoktZKZ6A steven seagal to the rescue in 1992. HA! Good Fun!

Well this one is black ☺ black, and as it turns out, 7.62. damnable internet. can find mini 14s with the exact same kit as the pictured 30, but in the interest o' full disclosure that weapon would be more akin to an ak-47 than a ar-15... albeit still semi-automatic. HA! Good Fun!

additional suggestion: show ruger mini 14 in our post above, and then offer the following pic explain that both is actual semi-automatic. in fact, is the same rifle. HA! Good Fun! ps (edit) found a more intriguing pic... given the side-by-side comparison

perhaps the most amusing aspect o' the video is that obviously the guy posting it didn't understand don's error. there is something sinister looking 'bout the ar-15 that makes many uneducated folks balk. the ruger below has near identical muzzle velocity and calibre as the ar-15. heck, without the pistol-grip, folding stock and flash suppressor options, the ruger ain't even subject to the previous assault weapons ban. go figure. *shrug* am always baffled when folks looks at a M1911 and somehow don't consider that such a weapon is just as much a semi-automatic weapon as the ar-15... and the M1911 has been responsible for far more us firearm homicides than the ar-15. perhaps link the following for folks: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2009-2013.xls dunno. won't help explain auto v. semi-auto, but perhaps can get folks to ease up on the semi-auto rifle fixations people gets after an orlando or san bernardino. HA! Good Fun! ps as an aside, US firearm suicides is almost 4 times greater than homicides, and suicide is, strangely enough, an act of convenience. suicide rates dropped dramatically in the 1930s. why? wasn't the great economy, that is for darn sure. nope, gas companies stopped using coal gas. ever see those old movies with guys killing self by putting their head in an unlit oven? weren't feasible once gas companies changed to natural gas in the 1930s and 1940s. no coal gas and US suicides drop by 30%. more recent, there has been a similar Spike in suicides. the spike in suicides corresponds directly with increase o' suicides by poisoning-- opioids. with the dramatic increase in opioid prescriptions by doctors in the last couple decades, there has been a corresponding increase in suicides. given even a short time to reflect, many folks change their minds regarding suicide. the easy access to firearms and opioids, more than the seeming more reasonable mental health or economic explanations, is the prime causes o' the startling US suicide figures. weird.

pan's labyrinth (2006) is another worthy o' best fantasy consideration. the more we think on the subject, the more fantastic fantasy films we recollect. am s'posing most will not consider raiders of the lost ark (1981) as fantasy? other worthies we wouldn't necessarily place in The Best category, but deserving mention is time bandits (1981), the dark crystal (1982), the secret of nimh (1982), the princess bride (1987), and edward scissorhands (1990). am thinking that all is better than any single lotr movie. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spHEw2n9LwE no. just, no. HA! Good Fun!

everybody these days seems to use lotr as the high-water mark for fantasy movies. am an admitted contrarian at times, but we actual liked the rankin and bass the hobbit more than any jackson film. skip "the scouring of the shire" were what we credit jackson for most regarding the lotr films. dragonslayer (1981) and conan the barbarian (1982) is, in our opinion, the best fantasy flicks evar, but only if one excludes the empire strikes back (1980). 'pon reflection, am s'posing that being john malkovich (1999) deserves a nod as well. the movie boasts excellent acting and it is crazy-arse unique. original ain't = good, but a good film that is also unique warrants recognition. HA! Good Fun! ps three other animated films deserve serious consideration for best fantasy: the last unicorn (1982), spirited away (2001) and song of the sea (2014). too often kids and/or animated movies is overlooked when discussing quality movies. is a shame. same happens with literature. pps can't believe we failed to mention brazil (1985).

in our experience, that is the case with all handguns. even highly trained peace officers miss with considerable frequency at ranges o' 6', so 6" is likely best for folks who ain't acclimated to shooting handguns in high stress encounters. actually, for folks not having training and experience firing a handgun while stressed, we suspect that one o' the most ancient o' weapons, the club (or baseball/cricket bat,) is gonna be the ideal close quarters home defense weapon. HA! Good Fun!

have eaten at a few top 50, and am hating to admit how much we enjoyed ryugin. the tokyo restaurant recent dropped from 20 to 31. is our opinion that the japanese restaurants has been considerable overrated-- the dining experience is often stressed over the food. even so, ryugin were almost flawless. am recalling that we checked the wiki for ryugin once and it mentioned something 'bout fusion. HA! is japanese, period. as is expected with high rated japanese faire, each dish were aesthetic pleasing, but it were genuine delicious as well. dishes we had experienced before were not. what me mean is that what we thought were traditional dishes were done in ways to surprise and delight. were perhaps not actual traditional, but still very much japanese. we will note that as with most elite japanese restaurants, you is made to feel as if you is one dining mistake away from having ninjas emerge from the shadows to dispatch you silent and efficient so that a more worthy patron could be taking your table. is a list o' dining dos and don'ts you is required to follow, and the staff, while efficient and polite, is anything but friendly. is also tiny. ryugin is one o' the few great tokyo restaurants that actually is. HA! Good Fun! ps 3 of top 50 is mexico city. we ain't never been to mexico city. that may need to change.

am seeing that alinea moved back up the top 50 restaurants list to number 15. am recalling doing their 13 course bit the last time we were in chicago. ... were an intriguing culinary experience, but as Gromnir were still kinda hungry afterwards, we stopped at a white castle. got 4 sliders, fries and a coke. yum. HA! Good Fun!

we got a pathological, knee-jerk, violent reaction to bees, wasps, hornets, yellowjackets and the like. one o' the many jobs we had in our youth were as a caddy at a nearby golf course. the job weren't nearly as amusing as caddyshack might lead you to believe. anywho, am recalling one particular sunny august day we worked as a caddy. the deuce ahead of Gromnir's group were a bit slow, so we had a couple minutes o' wait time at the 4th tee. we sat on a bench. the bench, unbeknownst to us, had a hornet's nest affixed to the underside. ... thus began one o' the more traumatic experiences o' our younger years. we were stung dozens o' times, including eyelid and nostril. got up our shirt, but not our pants. thank god for small favors, eh? we ran. we rolled on ground. we howled. much o' the experience is difficult to actual recall, but am certain o' the running, rolling and howling. regardless, even now, when we see a black and yellow flying insect with a stinger, our initial reaction is to kill. savage id channeling. HA! Good Fun!

Shes a big fan of Jameson's Charhouse so the family and extended family are gathering there tonight. Having a 16yo is a study in being ignored. Yes, shes allowed to date and I absolutely meet the boyfriends. Thanks! She wants to go to Columbia College IL, so I'm not looking forward to that. Its not totally outrageous but still like 10k more / year than Illinois State. south loop, yes? some kinda actor/media college? no football team, so am admitting ignorance o' the school. nifty neighborhood as am recollecting. HA! Good Fun!

so says the guy not in close proximity to a black hole. regardless, congratulations to you and your family... and try not to dwell on the cost o' a college education nowadays. HA! Good Fun!

last comment from us. many folks on these boards, Gromnir included, enjoy mocking the way trump panders to the lowest common denominator. trump wants to make america great again? what the hell does that even mean? he blames muslims and mexicans for violence and claims that something must be done 'bout such folks. trump tells us that we gotta be tougher when handling foreign enemies and allies. etc. ... trump is notorious for his emotional appeals that resonate with the less educated portions o' our populace. there is a sizeable percentage o' the voting demographic who do not realize that trump gots no actual concrete action plans. worse, when trump does have a method in mind for handling a problem such as muslim violence, his solution is typical complete and utter unfeasible and even illegal. like it or not, the typical cry from the left for gun control following a mass shooting is actual classic trump. many liberal politicians take advantage o' the emotionally charged atmosphere following a mass shooting to appeal to voters with a meaningless demand for increased gun control. most americans, particular after a mass shooting, is gonna poll in favor o' some kinda increase in gun control. politicians is aware o' the public mood and take advantage o' the situation by making wholly vacuous appeals for increased firearms safety regulations. we got a ridiculous number o' firearms in this country that is not gonna disappear with any kinda gun control legislation and the Constitution limits any meaningful efforts at gun control regardless. the vague action plans to curb gun violence offered up by the left in the wake o' sandy hook or orlando is either complete impractical or largely pointless, but such stuff resonates with voters who is justifiably angry and distraught. it costs the left nothing to demand change. when change fails to materialize, the left can then blame on the nra and judges... or just wait for the next orlando. those folks who mock trump for his ridiculous and empty appeals to the lowest common denominator better look to what the left does in wake o' mass shootings... and for those folks who buy into such appeals, you might consider that in this case, you is part o' the lowest common denominator. HA! Good Fun!

Mexico is included, as is Canada. Canada is on the pictured chart 2nd from bottom, Mexico isn't as it had too few deaths (2). It's definitely not uniquely american anyway, but I'd safely say that it's disproportionately so when compared to the other OECD countries as a whole. What constitutes a rampage killing is the biggest question. Buggered if I know, despite everyone describing them as OECD Rampage Shooting Index data or similar there's no OECD page on it and the chart sourcing for the total deaths is to a now defunct page. Presumably it involves mass (well, it includes some single death incidents so go figure) gun violence which has no 'criminal' intention except for the act itself, ie cannot be because of drug cartels fighting over territory or similar but the sole criminal act has to be the commission of the mass shooting. Not in the chart, just in thinking that only happens in the US. Just wonder how many corpses you have to pile up to get the Rampage achievement. I would guess 5, myself 4 "The FBI defines “mass shooting” as any incident where at least four people were murdered with a gun." http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/everytown-mass-shooting-analysis1.pdf no doubt there is other standards, but might as well use fbi given that folks (mistakenly) seem to think that mass shootings is uniquely american. as fighter observes, compare US to individual european nations is unfair given the population disparity. reverse and compare wisconsin to the eu? 'course not. the charts keyrock and Gromnir linked recognize the population disparity. "The CPRC has also collected data on the worst mass public shootings, those cases where at least 15 people were killed in the attack. "There were 16 cases where at least 15 people were killed. Out of those cases, four were in the United States, two in Germany, France, and the United Kingdom. "But the U.S. has a population four times greater than Germany’s and five times the U.K.’s, so on a per-capita basis the U.S. ranks low in comparison — actually, those two countries would have had a frequency of attacks 1.96 (Germany) and 2.46 (UK) times higher. "Small countries such as Norway, Israel and Australia may have only one major attack each, one-fourth of what the U.S. has suffered, but the US population is vastly greater. If they suffered attacks at a rate adjusted for their population, Norway, Israel and Australia would have had attacks that were respectively 16, 11, and 3 times greater than the US." etc. HA! Good Fun!

am not sure if you is serious. as homophobic and intolerant as is elements of the religious right in the US, to attribute the current violence to them is misplaced. blame christian right? blame jewish right? such groups frequent resist affording lgbt citizens equal rights, but is rare to hear calls for violence from such groups. and regardless, it seems highly unlikely that omar were a disciple o' jerry falwell. you think omar were tuning into jewish right broadcasts on saturday nights? we got a lesbian freind that we were speaking with earlier today and her reaction to the recent violence were... curious. somehow the violence perpetrated by a single isis advocate represented a massive reversal for the lgbt community. regardless o' how much the equality for lgbt citizens has improved in the last couple decades, the single act o' violence by an islamic extremist represented just how little progress had actually been made since the 60s. today it were a muslim extremist, but our friend were certain that this event were a harbinger o' more widespread violence. dismiss as terrorism were a way for the non lgbt folks to ignore the epidemic o' violence building like a thunderstorm on the horizon. clearly the religious right couldn't handle transvestites sharing their bathrooms, and because their legal resistance had failed, the religious right were turning violent. etc. ... honestly, we love our friend like a sister, but she were completely off her nut. am not ignoring the tragedy, but is no way to see this violence as somehow representative o' a greater shift towards violence by americans as a whole towards the lgbt community. any suggestion that the religious right as a whole made this specific act o' violence more likely cannot be advocated with any seriousness. am not dismissing that lgbt folks continue to be unfairly discriminated 'gainst by their fellow citizens, but to use this incident as an excuse to promote a larger crusade 'gainst the religious right would be unjust.

your confidence is misplaced http://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-public-shootings-in-the-us-and-europe/ HA! Good Fun!

Except they're not. That's completely false. Mass shootings have happened and continue to happen all over the world. In fact, if you take a ratio of mass shooting deaths compared to population, the US doesn't even make the top 5 (admittedly this chart doesn't include 2014, 2015, or 2016): the list keyrock reveals is much similar to the one we linked already... am only bringing up as is is noteworthy that if one changes the descriptor from mass shootings to mass violence, the US drops even further and belgium and russia makes massive leaps. why should we ignore bombings, eh? russia has very few mass shootings, but w/o guns, those wishing to do mass violence find a way. gun restrictions do not stop russian mass violence. HA! Good Fun!

You know Alum I'd even go along with that if I thought for a second that is where it would end. But it won't. The goal of the gun control crowd is no less than prohibition followed by confiscation. They are willing to do it incrementally but that is the end all things are leading towards. Each new "reasonable" restriction begets another "reasonable restriction" and another and another and another. The best way to ensure you never reach the bad end is don't start down the bad road. That is the heart of it right there. That is why you see people like me opposing even "reasonable" restrictions. Because we do not trust the government to be satisfied with that. We are not dealing with an honest partner. You have a better shot of convincing people if you don't automatically assume that those who disagree with you are Bond villains. People who want gun control in America don't gather to laugh maniacally about the success in the next stage of their Master Plan. (Or, well, they wouldn't if they ever achieved any political victories worth celebrating.) They're just ordinary citizens who are sick of seeing bullets hit things they care about. For my part, the horse is pretty much out of the barn on gun control. Sure, if I had the choice between a society with few guns in private hands, versus one with many, I'd pick the former 10 times out of 10. (The latter was a useful check on 17th-18th Century tyrants, which is why the 2nd Amendment was written, but modern technology has functionally destroyed the capacity of personal arms to overthrow a better-than-3rd-World oppressive sovereign power.) In America, though, that choice was made for me a long time ago-- both in the whole Constitution thing, and in the fact that there are just a ****load of guns out there. That sucks, and creates a whole lot more tragedies than there need to be, but that also doesn't make it smart to expend a whole lot of political capital tilting at that particular windmill. am mostly agreeing with enoch. truth to tell, in spite o' the Constitutional hurdles, Gromnir is in favor o' gun control in some form. 'course in our mind, handguns is the genuine menace, and semi-automatic weapons is a distraction from the problem. we would be in favor o' a magazine capacity limit, but as we noted already, am dubious 'bout the actual benefits o' such a measure. am also having a hard time finding common ground with gd who is clear untrusting o' the State in this matter. dunno. our background makes us highly suspicious o' The State's good intentions-- growing up in the shadow o' wounded knee can color the perspective o' a guy. even so, while we hunt no more, we do own numerous firearms, but paper targets is 'bout all we shoot at these days. regardless, all our "hunting" firearms is having no more than a five-shot magazine (our marlin 336 xlr... though our .22lr does have a box that holds 10 +1). am having a hard time envisioning a legit need for a 30 round magazine... particularly for an ar-15, which is NOT a hunting weapon with its .223 calibre. the slippery slope arguments for resisting any kind o' gun control for fear o' inevitable future excesses by the State is difficult for us to embrace. where we heartily disagree with enoch is his observations 'bout the impact o' a well-armed populace in confrontations with foreign or domestic armies. dismiss the war games scenario where US and a foreign power plays out global thermonuclear war. such stuff is apocalyptic but largely pointless. purpose o' an invasion is traditional to conquer and not just to destroy. *chuckle* even if a hypothetical chinese army could invade and hold territory in the United States, we cannot begin to imagine how bloody would be attempts to control populations in cities such pittsburgh (lots o' hunters and ferocious geography) or chicago or entire rural areas o' west virginia, kentucky, colorado, etc. shady can tell you just how forbidding the geography alone is in colorado. add an angry and well-armed population that includes a significant percentage o' experienced hunters? we can't even imagine how a domestic tyrant would establish control in urban or rural areas o' much o' the United States if some considerable portion o' the population chose to revolt or resist. urban fighting is notoriously bloody, but in US cities where citizen owned guns is so plentiful, we predict considerable carnage being visited 'pon foreign or domestic oppressors. heck, every male we knew growing up in the dakotas knew firearms basics and likely had some skill in hunting. *chuckle* looks at this board and see how many military veterans we got posting in this place. a large standing army means we got loads o' military veterans too... armed veterans. tanks, smart bombs and stealth fighters would be woeful inadequate weapons for maintaining control o' hostile populations in the united states. yeah, our marlin 336 xlr, remington 798 and savage mk ii is all feeble weapons that would be largely useless if we were attempting to stop US armour under the command o' emperor trump. still, am kinda warmed by the thought o' the abattoir trump's occupation forces would face from guerrilla fighters armed with weapons such as is in our personal arsenal as regular army units attempted to exert control throughout the foothills and sierra nevadas. ... am kidding 'bout the emperor trump stuff. mostly kidding. HA! Good Fun!

Well... no. I said that American culture has a weird obsession with guns, seeing them as symbols of freedom and rugged individualism, and given that mass shootings are a uniquely American phenomena, the culture surrounding guns and the societal perception thereof is likely a contributing factor in that. Sure, I don't think you should be, but restrictions on the magazine size sound reasonably enough to me, and I believe they have been in effect for quite some time. I assume you don't need 30 bullets to defend yourself from hostile fauna. mass shootings is not unique american http://crimeresearch.org/2015/06/comparing-death-rates-from-mass-public-shootings-in-the-us-and-europe/ and the efficacy o' magazine size limits, as our earlier linked article reveals, is rather difficult to gauge. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/data-point-to-drop-in-high-capacity-magazines-during-federal-gun-ban/2013/01/10/d56d3bb6-4b91-11e2-a6a6-aabac85e8036_story.html HA! Good Fun! ps far more people in the US is killed with handguns than with semi-auto assault rifles. in spite of the media fascination with assault rifles, our personal gun control focus has always been handguns. pps everybody likes easy to read pie charts, yes? bloomberg study is curious http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/everytown-mass-shooting-analysis1.pdf

'Assault rifle' is an emotive term though, for a medium to high calibre weapon that has an automatic, military, equivalent. A semi auto 'assault rifle' is functionally identical to a semi auto hunting rifle in everything except look and (in the US at least, and iirc) magazine size. We have far stronger gun control laws here but I could, theoretically, walk into a gun store and buy an AR-15/ AK-74/ SKS/ FN FAL. I'd only do it if I needed to control pigs or deer as the idea of trying to shoot them with a .22 is both moronic and barbaric and I'd get a proper hunting rifle, but functionally that FN FAL 'assault rifle' would be exactly the same as a .308 'hunting rifle'. zor is correct. in fact, an ar-15 that hasn't been rechambered for big game weighs in at a paltry .223. that being said, in most states, the typical magazine size for an ar-15 is 30 and quick-release. various states has put limits on magazine capacity. 'course the impact o' limits on magazine size is not easy to gauge. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/data-point-to-drop-in-high-capacity-magazines-during-federal-gun-ban/2013/01/10/d56d3bb6-4b91-11e2-a6a6-aabac85e8036_story.html as to our earlier question, while the Court has been a bit conflicted 'bout the level o' scrutiny the second amendment deserves, the law o' the land is that the right to bear arms is defended with greater vigor than is the right to be free o' searches and seizures by the State. District of Columbia v. Heller uses the language o' strict scrutiny, but the Court appears to actual apply intermediate scrutiny under certain conditions. regardless, fourth amendment search and seizure is only gonna protect against unreasonable State action, which is a less onerous burden for the state to overcome than is intermediate or strict scrutiny. the point is that simple acts o' Congress or state legislatures is likely gonna be ineffective in reducing an American citizen's access to firearms. like it or not, the right to bear arms gets the full extent o' Constitutional protections. when folks demand more rigorous gun control provisions, they is wholly ignorant o' the herculean task they is demanding. the hurdle that prevents meaningful gun control is not American's fascination with guns. the real obstacle is the the Constitution of the United States. HA! Good Fun!

which Constitutional freedom is more deserving o' protection: the right to bear arms or the prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures? clue: the answer is in the question. HA! Good Fun!

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/06/12/us/what-happened-at-the-orlando-nightclub-shooting.html http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/12/us/orlando-nightclub-shooting/ http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-updates-shooting-at-pulse-nightclub-20160612-htmlstory.html http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-orlando-nightclub-shooting-live-updates-htmlstory.html