Dear God, I'm not really a believer, but I'll give you an amen for a well placed lightning bolt right about now.

North of the border, anyone wishing to buy a gun or ammunition must have a valid licence under the Firearms Act, and to obtain a firearms licence, all applicants must undergo a screening process, which includes a safety course, criminal history and background checks, provision of personal references, and a mandatory waiting period. The law further prohibits military-grade assault weapons such as AK-47s and sawn-off rifles or shotguns. Handguns are generally classified as restricted weapons, while rifles and shotguns are usually non-restricted.

There are only a few purposes for which individuals can obtain a restricted firearms licence in Canada, "the most common being target practice or target shooting competitions, or as part of a collection."

Based on your article and what else I've read, that means that pump, bolt action, and single shot rifles/shotguns are ok. Everything else is pretty much a no go. Sounds like some pretty heavy restrictions, although I did note there is a huge demand for ar-15 style rifles to be allowed in Canada.

But yes, the bulk of our shooting issue is the culture of our country. We are very diverse in culture, as well as familial structure. I would say that our culture and population is unlike any other in the world (except Australia, oddly. from what I've seen, I think they are sort of the USA lite version). Realistically, barring massive limitations to gun ownership, we are not going to stop mass shootings in the USA. I honestly don't think we will stop it then either, what with the sieve of a border we have, guns will just become the new coke/meth. Not to mention AR-15 style rifles aren't exactly hard to build. Other than the barrel and the bolt, most of the other pieces can be hand milled out of semi finished pieces that are completely legal for anyone to have.

Maybe we could do like Switzerland, their gun control seems to work.

It doesn't work like that. What you end up with is something akin to Australia's gun laws, which 'technically' still allow certain people to own guns, realistically most won't or can't

Category A: Rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), circuit loaded firearms. shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles including semi automatic, and paintball gun. A "Genuine Reason" must be provided for a Category A firearm. [AKA, you have to prove you have a reason to own these weapons. Newsflash, the majority of police will automatically deny you. Oh yeah, for a PAINTBALL gun as well.]

Category B: Centrefire rifles including bolt action, pump action, circuit loaded, and lever action (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901. [Same as Cat A, must have a 'genuine reason' to own one, be registered, have a fee, ton of other limitations, so basically hard to own]

Category C: Pump-action or self-loading shotguns having a magazine capacity of 5 or fewer rounds and semi automatic rimfire rifles. [Only Primary producers, farm workers, firearm dealers, firearm safety officers, collectors and clay target shooters can own functional Category C firearms.]

Category D: Self-loading centrefire rifles, pump-action or self-loading shotguns have a magazine capacity of more than 5 rounds. [Functional Category D firearms are restricted to government agencies, occupational shooters and primary producers in some states. Collectors may own deactivated Category D firearms.]

Category H: Handguns including air pistols and deactivated handguns. [This class is available to target shooters and certain security guards whose job requires possession of a firearm. To be eligible for a Category H firearm, a target shooter must serve a probationary period of 6 months using club handguns, after which they may apply for a permit. A minimum number of matches yearly to retain each category of handgun and be a paid-up member of an approved pistol club. Target shooters are limited to handguns of .38 or 9mm calibre or less and magazines may hold a maximum of 10 rounds. Participants in certain "approved" pistol competitions may acquire handguns up to .45", currently Single Action Shooting and Metallic Silhouette. IPSC shooting is approved for 9mm/.38/.357 sig, handguns that meet the IPSC rules, larger calibres such as .45 were approved for IPSC handgun shooting contests in Australia in 2014. Barrels must be at least 100mm (3.94") long for revolvers, and 120mm (4.72") for semi-automatic pistols unless the pistols are clearly ISSF target pistols; magazines are restricted to 10 rounds.]

Category R/E: Restricted weapons, such as machine guns, rocket launchers, full automatic self loading rifles, flame-throwers, anti-tank guns, howitzers and other artillery weapons [Obviously this class is right out...]

You can own some muzzleloading weapons without restrictions, although percussion cap pistols are restricted. In addition to these minor rules, all guns must be secured in a safe or other similar location, all must be fully registered so that the government knows the location of every single weapon/owner, and you can't sell them to another person, only to a dealer or the law to be destroyed.

After a few years of de-fanging and getting the citizens used to not having weapons, the Australian government and law enforcement routinely quietly hold gun buybacks to persuade more people to give up their weapons. They also do amnesty turn ins now and then.

So, that is the AMAZING suite of laws Australia put in place to stop mass shootings. Forgive me if, when combined, those type of laws would basically neuter the 2nd amendment. We've already neutered the 1st with 'hate speech' and the ability to sue over getting your feelings hurt. The 4th has been steadily under attack, because GOOD citizens shouldn't mind if the government rummages through everything you own or do. We haven't messed with the 5th amendment too much, so we could look at that next, maybe allow torture of everyone for confessions.

I'm getting tired of listing points, so let me just say this. I am incredibly sorry that people died, they shouldn't have and it is an utter shame. However, we are already fighting on a daily basis to keep a facsimile of the rights that were fought for when we built this country. Watering them down further only helps our government tighten the bonds of enslavement upon us. I can't agree with that.

The entire arm seems to twist and fails at the joint of the arm on the camera which seems offset from the center of gravity of the weight and camera. Probably the cutting and snapping of a 1/4th steel bolt or something. Camera-weight need to be completely leveled flush (+/- 0.6°) by the awesome weights as a closed object system. I believe correcting this torsion by putting that universal joint center in line with the center of gravity of the camera-weight would prevent that torsion. This would mean that the joint center would have to be somewhere central in that column tube thingy. The over extension and over snapping can only be fixed with built-in stops, I dunno.

Somewhat disappointed that he didn't include my personal favorite argument against Pascal's Wager: conflicting faiths.

Instead of a 4-cell chart (2x2 from believe/don't believe and god exists/doesn't), the chart should arguably be a LOT bigger. Plenty of individual branches of Christianity will tell you that *their* specific brand is the only one that will get you into heaven. And that's just relatively minor distinctions -- different sorts of Protestants, or Protestants vs Catholics, etc. We haven't even got to Christianity vs Judaism vs Islam -- all of which fall under the "Abrahamic" umbrella -- but very few Christian faiths think that Jews or Muslims are just as eligible to enter heaven as they are (or vice-versa). From there you can get to things as disparate as Hindu vs Ancient Egyptian vs Zoroastrianism, and everything else.

With that sort of chart, it is just as easy to say that choosing to believe in the *wrong* god could possibly be associated with a more negative outcome than washing your hands of it and going Atheist. Maybe I chose to believe in Ra the Sun God when Zeus ends up being the one true deity. Come to find that Zeus, as it turns out, tolerates people who don't believe in him as long as they don't believe in one of his competitors (like Ra). Therefore I get a lightning bolt to the keyster and a trip to Hades while my nonbeliever buddy gets a ticket to Elysium.

Of course it's all a load of bollocks, but if your argument is a load of bollocks (like Pascal's wager) you don't get to complain when somebody flips it on its head and uses it to argue the exact opposite...

I get your point, but I think it should be 'Procedure A will cost you $______....assuming there are no complications."
I actually must disagree about your analogy of the car...because it is like taking your car to a shop but not knowing exactly what's wrong...chances are the price they quote for the service they THINK will solve the problem won't be the final price because they're just guessing at what they'll have to do...they can't KNOW there won't be rusted bolts or other damage that's only visible after taking the timing cover off. That said, they CAN give you a quote for taking the timing cover off, and if pressed, for replacing the cracked block if that's behind it. Hospitals absolutely refuse to estimate, or to give a solid price for a specific service. I think that's the big problem, as it allows them to charge you one price and me another, and insurance another, Medicare another, etc. It's the floating price scheme that's unconscionable, especially for services that are life and death when you can't say "no thanks". It allows them to 'serve' you THEN tell you the aspirin they gave you costs $800. That's unfair by any reasoning.

Sons of New York, I am Bernie Sanders!

'Bernie Sanders is 7 feet tall'

Yes, I’ve heard, kills Republicans by the hundreds, and if he were here he would consume Hillary with fireballs from his eyes and bolts of lightning from his arse. I am Bernie Sanders, and I see a whole army of my countrymen, here in defiance of tyranny. You’ve come to vote as free men, and free men you are. What will you do without freedom? Will you vote?

'…against that? No, we will run, and we will live…'

Aye, vote and you may die, run and you’ll live. At least a while. And dying in your beds, many years from now, would you be willing to trade all the days from this day to that for one chance, just one chance to come back here and tell our enemies that they may take our lives, but they’ll never take our FREEDOM!

Won't shoot a 22 shell or a crossbow bolt, so what's the point... I bet you couldn't even get a shotgun shell in there!

Have to disagree with Star Wars.

Without the massive appeal the series built, this movie wouldn't get many good reviews at all. The plot is an insane jumble of random events and plotholes that should have been embarrassing. To enumerate a few:

1) Randomly Melennium Falcon happens to be at the right place, right time (I can buy this, barely, because it's fun)

2) Before they can even have a full conversation (something the filmmakers seemed determined to avoid, even though, as this list shows, dialogue can make riveting cinema) HS and Chewie burst in. I could buy into this, if not for the rapid-fire pace of these events, as it is it just seems random and things are starting to get silly.

3) Before THEY can even have a full conversation not one, but two gangs HAPPEN upon the group, for no reason, except some executive was apparently worried about giving the audience a moment to reflect and MAYBE develop some connection with the characters.

4) Kylo Ren kicks ass. He's the only Force master EVER to stop a blaster bolt mid progress. He's got some serious juice!

5) Kylo Ren can't fight his way out of a paper bag (a bag named Finn) narrowly winning the fight and merely wounding the otherwise fairly useless ex-stormtrooper.

6) Kylo Ren is BEATEN by some chick with no training whatsoever! (Don't get me wrong, I like Rey, but the good guys are SUPPOSED to be weaker than the bad guys, and what's the point in Jedi training if she already kicks Evil's ass? )

7) WTF is up with this whiny Emo? He is, bar-none, the worst villain of the entire SW series thus far. It's not surprising that they defeat him, he's so useless, what's surprising is it takes them so damn long to beat his whining Emo shitty-at-lightsaber-duelling ass.

IMO the whole film was a hot mess that reeked of far too much studio interference which turns artistic vision into "more explosions!"

In summary, and this is totally true, my ten-year-old son, who loved the first 3 SWs (I won't let him watch the prequels) when asked what he thought of it replied, "Too many explosions." This is the mediocrity paradigm of big-budget Hollywood films at it's pinnacle.

This is the best. You couldn't have wished for a better reaction than that bolt-upright realization and scream at the camera. Then his floundering toward shore, culminating in that soggy miffed face at the very end. What a goldmine!

Sure, that sucks more than usual, but again padlocks aren't for locking up valuable things. They prevent opportunistic casual theft. They're one step above luggage locks--only better than a nylon zip-tie because they can be reused.

If you use this with the intention of keeping out the class of people who might know this trick or bring tools along for their burgling, (like say a $20 bolt cutter that will do for most any padlock) you're doing it wrong.

Your video, Can a Star Wars Blaster Bolt Be Dodged?, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Once again, it is literally his job description to look somewhere other than the direction he's going. Thousands of camerapeople do this at sporting events the world over. If you have an issue with that, it's the employer's fault, not the guy who was just doing his job.

Now, that said, even though it's an accident, he's certainly responsible and more importantly, liable (although technically, I'd imagine the liability would fall on his employer).

None of which would excuse punching the guy. If Bolt had punched him, "feeling bad about it afterwards" would be the least of his problems. Obviously, it depends on the jurisdiction, but generally, losing your temper is not an acceptable defence for assault, unless he had reasonable grounds to say that he was defending himself somehow.

A) it's his job to use the camera on the segway. It's not like he's just being lazy.

B) at 5 seconds, he hits the rail on the right. I don't think anyone could have recovered from that.

Basically, it was an accident. Sometimes unforeseen things happen. It's certainly unfortunate, but I don't think you could call it "careless".

Besides, even if you were pretty pissed, you do realise that "decking" someone is assault, right? Being involved in an accident isn't a legal defence for assaulting someone. If Bolt had punched him, he'd most likely be facing charges and 100% facing a lawsuit.

'Deck' may be over the top. Putting myself in his shoes, at the time, it may have seemed intentional. He just got up and kept going which seemed odd. I'm sure I would have asked the dude what had happened. In retrospect, after seeing the whole video, I'd be pretty pissed that this idiot is tooling along on his segway apparently not competent to operate it (and couldn't he have just walked along with the camera?). It's about as careless as texting while driving. I'm not sure if Usain Bolt is still winning races, but the legs this guy ran into are what puts food on his plate. So yes, I'd be pretty pissed.