Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619

Not only. We gave a fair amount of 'free stuff' to Great Britain in the '40s. And to Europe in the aftermath of the War. Just a couple of examples.....

Luck figures in. I defended two unrelated lawsuits where, in each, a bicyclist hit a claimed road defect, rotated over, hit the top of the head. Both ended up quadraplegic. When we're kids, the body seems more forgiving. Less mass is part of it. We'd fall down the stairs, jump up and run off. Not any more...

In addition to most of the above, we had a big ravine nearby that ran down to Puget Sound. We practically grew up in it; we'd be down there for hours at a time. The big thing we did there was rope swings; when you swung out all the way, you were 75-100 feet above ground. If you fell, you'd die. So you held onto the rope and didn't fall (we did have a loop for a foot.....)

I was in business for many years myself, and played no cons. To me a con man lies and cheats to fraudulently deceive others out of their money.

Same judge is presiding over his case. Same charge as against the armorer. If the jury finds him guilty (hardly a forgone conclusion) I expect she would give him the same sentence. That would be my bet.

It's true: Calvin and Hobbes by Bill Watterson for November 09, 2014 - GoComics

True enough. When I'm backpacking and set up camp, I take off the boots but sometimes leave the socks on....

Depends on whether you're still in business or not anymore. In business you put up with a lot of things you wouldn't when you're retired. If I had a major client's exec secretary call, I'd hold.

Not now, though!

Apart from the specific facts of the case, this lady seems just completely vacuous somehow. Drugging on the set, oblivious to responsibility, and equally oblivious when she's denouncing the jury and the judge in recorded telephone calls before sentencing. Totally clueless. There just seems to be no there, there....

Grant was 62 when he had his first (and only) child.

Lots of folks keep working long after they no longer need the money, because they like still being creative and productive for as long as they are able.

Haven't shot a cowboy match in a long time, but my OMV Bisley in .45 remains a favorite and I take it to the range often still.

1. Some; depends on the state. 2. Likewise it depends on the state, but there must be substantial reasons to depart from the guidelines, such as egregious circumstances,. 3. He can tack on something for contempt, but not that much.

Perhaps I misunderstood your post. She didn't say the armorer was solely responsible for the death. For the presence of the live round, it looks like she did say that. Baldwin goes to trial by jury in the same courtroom this Summer.

The judge didn't say she was 'solely responsible'.

“You were the armorer, the one that stood between a safe weapon and a weapon that could kill someone,” the judge told Gutierrez-Reed. “You alone turned a safe weapon into a lethal weapon. But for you, Ms. Hutchins would be alive, a husband would have his partner and a little boy would have his mother.” Ms. Reed likely did herself no good by forgetting that phone calls from jail are recorded; calling the jurors idiots, the judge 'paid', and generally expressing self-pity. All before her sentencing....

You do a double take the first time you see wholly masculine men in Italy who are old friends, walking down the street hand in hand. And if you look at personal correspondence between friends in the 19th century you may be surprised at the expressions of emotion and affection. Only in our unfortunate time do folks now tend to read a sexual aspect into it, which in fact was completely absent.

His service record was pretty well-known. At least as time went by. In the years and decades immediately after the war, there was not a lot of discussion of the service records of actors who, along with millions of others, had served. Everybody just wanted to get on with life, and why extol a record of a sort shared by a great many others? This changed, of course, eventually, and as Pat points out, 20 or 30 years ago Arnold's fine record was publicized.

Where?

It's all good, I think.

Great pix.

Those would have to be some medical advances!

This is good, and doubtless a fine revolver. And I have a Ruger Redhawk that I like to shoot Specials mostly in, too. But while it may be 'light' for a .44 magnum, at 37.5 oz it's not a 'lightweight .44 special'! The Bulldog is a genuine lightweight. At 19.5 oz, it's just 6 oz more than a Ruger LCR .38. When I hike with a pack, which has a hip belt, it's in my pocket. I don't even notice it's there....

To me the selling point on the .44 Bulldog is the light weight, given the appealing caliber. It makes for very easy carry. That 696 S&W is very cool, but twice the weight of the Bulldog. The GP100 even more so (as I recall). Light weight in a big bore. It's a niche for sure; maybe why it's the only one.