StrangeSox

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 6, 2016 -> 09:04 AM) Yeah I don't know what else to say except b****ing about how low a punishment a judge gave in a case and going to bat for the mandatory minimum is literally the argument that makes mandatory minimum. Nah, because I can simultaneously oppose mandatory minimums while still disagreeing with specific sentences in specific cases. I would not have cared much (or known!) if they had only received their original sentences, but I also don't think five years is out of line given their history of not caring about damaging private and public property and endangering lives. Nothing about thinking a specific sentence was too light necessarily implies support for universal mandatory minimums. Judicial discretion means that sometimes you'd disagree with what judges decide, and that's okay! I can be annoyed by that "affluenza" judge in Texas while recognizing that, in the aggregate, judicial discretion in sentencing is much, much better than mandatory minimums, three-strike laws etc.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 6, 2016 -> 08:58 AM) You can't be against mandatory minimums and suddenly go to bat for them when its a constituency you don't like, that is literally why mandatory minimums exist and are so hard to get rid of. Looking at sentences for wild firefighters that set fires for work and caused significantly more damage their sentences were higher but time served appears to be marginal. Penalties were huge for damage. I can be against the concept of mandatory minimums and still think that in specific Case X, the mandatory minimum was still actually a fair sentence that should have been imposed regardless of the existence of a mandatory minimum. How you go from "I think five years is actually a decent sentence for what they did and given how s***ty they've been in the past" to "OMG LIFE SENTENCE WAY TO GO 'TOUGH ON CRIME' DEMOCRAT!" is still a mystery.

To be fair I guess, they were only convicted of a couple of the Section 844 arson counts and not the conspiracy counts, so absent the mandatory minimums 1-2 years for arson doesn't seem unreasonable. But these two guys are not exactly sympathetic characters and the actual case is not as odd as it may appear on the surface.

Militia clowns were saying yesterday that they'd leave if the local community wanted them to leave. I thought that it was a way for them to try to save face after their bluster about "staying for months" and "please send snacks" after the local sheriff and community made it abundantly clear that they want nothing to do with these jokers. But now they've shifted to demanding the transfer of public land to loggers and ranchers. http://news.yahoo.com/no-hurry-defense-ref...50209.html?nf=1 As long as these guys actually get arrested at the end of all of this (unlike the Bundy standoff which resulted in nothing despite armed resistance to federal law enforcement efforts), the feds really should just wait these guys out.

That was a pretty terrible post bmags for essentially disagreeing on a 2 or 5 year sentence.

What about for threatening firefighters and seemingly intentionally endangering their lives? They've also been accused of child abuse by their nephew: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016...hild-abuse.html

Antigovernment Militia Groups Grew by More than One-Third in Last Year

I dunno, those ranchers are serial offenders who endangered the lives of volunteer firefighters after being explicitly told not to set fires because there were firefighters in the area. Mandatory minimums are dumb in general, but having a good ol' boy judge blatantly ignore the law isn't exactly a great solution either. So I read through the original indictment. Granted it's the prosecution's side of the story, but they did a lot more than just set two fires that accidentally encroached on BLM land. They were warned as far back as 1999 that they should have a proscribed burn plan in place with the BLM and that if they didn't, any future fires that encroached on BLM land would be considered trespass. They never put a plan in place, they continued to set fires that were either on BLM property or spread to it, some of their fires spread to neighboring private land, and they actively obstructed and endangered BLM firefighters. If even half of the quotes in the indictment are true, these guys deserve every bit of five years. eta: they also threatened firefighters to "make this go away" or they'd claim that the firefighters had really started all of the fires. edit2: they had run-ins with the law and obstructing federal workers going back over two decades. http://www.hcn.org/issues/20/582

The Audobon Society of Portland has a statement out on the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge and its ecological importance. http://audubonportland.org/news/audubon-so...wildlife-refuge

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 4, 2016 -> 04:48 PM) Blah blah blah Fox News, who cares which outlets are covering this more? Fox New is covering it, I've seen it. CNN and everyone else is too. I really don't think this matters. What matters is how to handle the sedition. I think the Feds are right to wait it out a bit, then go in carefully to negotiate these guys out. They're scum who should be federally prosecuted, but that doesn't mean you want a gunfight. Now, if this drags on for weeks or months, and all peaceful efforts fail, at some point, you need to go in there and get them out. Preferably you use tear gas or something and do an HRT-style thing as opposed to a military action. But I sure as heck wouldn't want to do anything that puts federal officers or soldiers in danger, so if it comes to that, these idiots in the refuge can go screw themselves. I have little sympathy for the outcome for them. The worst part of this is, the locals don't want them there, nor does the state, nor do the people they are supposedly acting on behalf of. They aren't patriots, they're thugs. Pretty much this.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 4, 2016 -> 10:50 AM) This group really isn't a threat of anything except embarrassing themselves. Not making them martyrs is the smart move. Nobody thinks Waco was handled well, and that started with them shooting at ATF agents. Let it ride, do not go in. Maybe play loud music, cut power, etc. Treat it like a hostage situation. Although I'm not sure what it says when basically any obstinate behavior in an episode with a police officer where you end up dead is considered justified, but if the Feds went in guns blazing to a group that has taken over federal property with guns gets people the benefit of the doubt. Oh yeah, definitely not saying they need to storm the compound or anything, but they can't just let them win like they did at the Bundy ranch. If they want a siege and to live in a tiny cabin with allegedly 150 dudes (more like 20) for months/years like they're saying, give it to them. Nobody needs to die here, despite their "willing to kill or be killed" rhetoric.

The feds really can't back down again like they did the first time these guys pointed weapons at BLM officials.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jan 3, 2016 -> 11:07 PM) They are mad because the BLM got 2 farmers convicted as terrorists for starting a fire on their land that also burned 150 acres of BLM controlled land. That terrorist designation will screw them up for the rest of their lives. Yet they often let other 'terrorists' go free (enviro protestors, BLM asshole, etc). That's what they were originally mad about, but the 2 ranchers told these crazy militia guys to go away, they didn't want their "support" and neither did the local community, so the militia guys went and took over a national wildlife refuge. They believe that this land was illegally acquired by the federal government (along with most/all? federally controlled land in the west) and represents "tyranny." They want it turned over to "local control" aka ranchers/miners/loggers. As for the original two guys, there are allegations that they started the first fire to cover up illegal poaching from BLM land. There's also the nature of Western wildfires, where a small 150 acre fire can become 1500 acres in a matter of hours. The second 1-acre fire was set as a firebreak, but allegedly endangered volunteer firefighters who were in the area fighting a lightning-caused wildfire. More information on the backstory of that here. They weren't "convicted as terrorists" but were sentenced to a mandatory minimum 5 years under a law called Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 which includes the mandatory 5 years for arson which destroys any real property owned by the federal government. They aren't designated as terrorists, and they were never called terrorists by the government. Environmental groups are much more likely to be followed, tracked and harassed by the FBI than right-wing militia groups, generally speaking. The FBI spent a lot of time and effort in the mid 00's on ELF/ALF, and it even resulted in very similar sentences for arson in Oregon.

QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Dec 28, 2015 -> 01:26 PM) Obi-Wan's story is unknown. Anakin was conceived by Darth Plagueis' manipulation of midichlorians to create a powerful Sith leader. God I hate the prequels for introducing that sort of garbage. Basically agree with Steve. Solid B.

Right wing terrorists take over federal building in Oregon; includes two of cliven buddy's sons http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/01/0...deral-building/

QUOTE (scs787 @ Dec 29, 2015 -> 02:34 PM) Has anyone ever bought prescription glasses online? They're super cheap, but how do you adjust them to your face? Will an eyeglass place do it even if you didn't buy them from them? I just bend the hell out of mine on my own when I get them from the eye doctors usually. If there's somewhere you usually go to for eye exams, they'd probably be willing to help.

I'd imagine most water heaters around Chicago are natural gas, it'd just be a typical installation as far as I know. I just don't feel like lugging a couple hundred pounds down the basement stairs (new water heater) and a couple hundred pounds up the basement stairs (old water heater) as I'm sure we'll have 1000 other things going on when we first move int. The water heater in the home we're buying is old (approximately 14 years) anyway, and it might also be the source of the sulfer-y smell that comes when you turn on the hot water. I'm hoping that a new water heater would solve that problem and save me from spending a few thousand on a water treatment system, but even if it doesn't, that water heater is going to need replacing within a few years anyway and we have the cash on hand now from the sale of our current house to do it. Looking around online, apparently you can get wifi modules for your water heater. What would ever be the point of that? Unless it could somehow monitor and alarm if there was a gas problem or a water leak, why would I ever need to control my water heater temperature remotely? I think I've touched our current water heater thermostat once in five years.

Anyone know the typical installed cost for a new high efficiency water heater (40 or 50 gallons)? edit: this would be a like-for-like replacement of a natural gas WH

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 23, 2015 -> 03:36 PM) Trying to figure out how the hell to finish the outlets... Ever get this figured out?

From the defense attorney's prosecutor's press conference: The prosecutors also recommended to the grand jury that no charges be made and did everything they could to ensure that.

Absurd.

29% of voters liking someone else does not imply they would like a John Kasich-Bob Casey ticket. Two guys who can barely get any support on their own don't combine into a credible challenge to front-runners. Doesn't Rasmussen almost always bias slightly towards Republicans in Presidential polls?

QUOTE (BigHurt3515 @ Dec 26, 2015 -> 11:08 PM) How lenient is Southwest with carry on luggage? Their dimensions are; 10 x 16 x 24. A bag we have is 11 x 15 x 24, will they allow that on? I assume they don't measure every bag. They don't. As long as it fits in the overhead nobody is going to care, and you shouldn't have any problems.