Scarfs are for people from Toronto and Vancouver who really have no f*#king clue how to dress for Winter. A good lined hood and a touque will do just fine, and if it dips below -30c haul out the dickie.

One can easily survive almost any Southern Canadian Winter (the majority of our population lives within 100km of the US border) with a coat like this:

http://1loveto.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/2082M_Black.jpg

Once you go North you may have to re-gear.

If you really want to add some fuel to your, shall we say, "dislike" of HRC, have a look at this. It's an excerpt of Thomas Frank's new book "Listen, Liberal!". Afterwards, you might have to reassure yourself that HRC is, in fact, not a creation of John Cleese's or Terry Jones'.

Edit: I should probably have provided an appetizer.

"For poor and working-class American women, the floor was pulled up and hauled off to the landfill some twenty years ago. There is no State Department somewhere to pay for their cell phones or to pick up their day-care expenses. And one of the people who helped to work this deed was the very woman I watched present herself as the champion of the world’s downtrodden femininity."

The kid is a bad apple. He is coming from court and being hauled away for his juvie crime.

The cop is right for not taking crap from a delinquent teen.

The Radicalized Christian Terrorist illegally occupying a federal wildlife refuge

Fixed that for the Guardian... perhaps they can throw in "allegedly" before the word "illegally" if they wanted to play it overly safe, but let's stop mistreating the word militiamen as this is not what they are. They are using the threat of armed violence to achieve a political goal. That is terrorism. They say they are doing it in the name of God. That makes it Radicalized Christian terrorism.

These guys said they would leave if asked by the local community, they were asked, they've been asked by the tribe, the community, their church, and everyone else. Yet they are still there... They were prepared for the long haul... though apparently they needed to ask for essential supplies, so perhaps they are confused on what being "prepared for the long haul" means.

Probably less than providing meals and water for a harvesting crew that has to pick, clean, cut, and haul all that. Just a guess.

They had to have special cargo tie-downs installed. You know, like the kind they use when they need to haul a whale between zoo exhibits on a giant truck...

The more I see of it, the less hopeful I am. I still think it's going to be pretty cool, but it's seeming a little too grindy and a little too procedurally generated to the point of being superficial. Hopefully that's just because it's unfinished or they're holding things back.

What I liked about Freelancer, for instance, was that every NPC ship you came across had an identity and was apparently doing something the player might do. You could hail them and they'd say they're hauling some commodity from wherever to wherever or whatever, and if you followed them, that's exactly what they'd be doing. It anchored them to the universe and made it seem purposeful and alive. The ship encounters we've seen in this so far seem more like randomly spawned set dressing. The actual distinction between the two is purely illusion, but that illusion is important.

Your video, Old Unimog Hauling Logs Like A Boss, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

According to Herodotus, the way to catch a crocodile is this. First you bait a hook with pork and float it in the water. Then you get a live pig and beat it with sticks. The pig's squealing will attract the crocodile, which will gulp down the pork as an appetiser. Then you simply haul it onto land, slap mud in its eyes to disable it and it's easily enough dispatched.

Negative, chief.

1) If you turn up the volume and listen closely, you can hear him change gears right before he starts accelerating. Are you really claiming it's not possible for a big-rig to change to a higher gear and put their foot down on the gas in a way that it would increase its speed?

2) The Nissan in front of him wasn't slowing down.

3) From all my years as a rambling man in the trucking game hauling loads down winding roads from Anaheim to New Orleans, truckers know full well how to teach a blonde bitch a lesson usually with the voice of CB Savage (look it up) in the back of their mind. If he wasn't trying to scare or collide, he could have slowed to prevent the accident. Unless you're saying big-rigs are also not capable of slowing down.

I love how passionate everybody is about debating traffic. How cute we all are.

I'd be interested to see the haul these guys bring back in data...if and when they make it back.

You almost never hear of an NHL player being upset (in a litigation sort of way) about injuries they got that resulted from fighting (drop the gloves and throw punches).

In general, the one major incident I am aware of that resulted in legal action being taken against a player was when Todd Bertuzzi checked Steve Moore down the the ice from behind and then drove his head/neck into the ice with his stick in some heavy followup hits. This is mentioned in the wikipedia article @eric3579 posted, and hinted at in the article @RedSky posted from the Economist.

In that incident, Steve Moore (a lower-level player on the Colorado Avalanche) had hit Marcus Naslund (a star level player of the Vancouver Canucks) in a previous game. That hit was a fairly normal hockey hit -- Naslund had the puck, Moore intentionally hit him to try to separate him from the puck, but arguably led with his elbow to Naslund's head. It was a dangerous play, that should have be penalized (it wasn't) -- although I don't think Moore intended to cause injury. It is a fast game, sometimes you can't react quick enough to avoid a dangerous collision like that. Still, I think that kind of play should be penalized to make it clear to players that they need to avoid dangerous plays if possible. Steve Moore didn't have a history of dirty or dangerous play, but still.

Anyway, all of that dovetails in pretty nicely with my previous post, specifically about what leads to a "spontaneous fight". Moore, a 3-4th line guy (lower ranks of skill/ability on the team) hit star player Naslund. In almost ANY hockey game where that kind of thing happens, you can expect that somebody from the star's team is going to go over to the offending player and push them around, probably with the intent to fight them. Usually it happens right at the time of the incident, but here it was delayed to a following game between the two teams.

In the next game between Colorado and Vancouver, Moore got challenged by a Vancouver player early in the first period and fought him. But I guess that the lag time and injury to Naslund (he ended up missing 3 games) had brewed up more bad blood than that so many Vancouver players hadn't gotten it fully out of their systems. Later in the game, Todd Bertuzzi skated up behind Moore when he didn't have the puck, grabbed him and tailed him for several seconds trying to get him into a second fight, and when he didn't respond just hauled back and punched him in the back of the head.

Moore fell to the ice, where Bertuzzi piled on him and drove his head into the ice. A big scrum/dogpile ensued, with Moore on the bottom. As a result of that, Moore fractured 3 vertebrae in his neck, stretched or tore some neck ligaments, got his face pretty cut up, etc. Pretty severe injuries.

So, in comparison:
Moore (lesser skill) hit Naslund (high skill) resulting in a minor(ish) injury, that could have ended up being much worse. But, it was a legitimate hockey play that just happened to occur at a time when Naslund was vulnerable -- arguably no intent to harm/injure.
Bertuzzi hit Moore in a following game, after he had already "answered" for his hit on Naslund by fighting a Vancouver player. Bertuzzi punched him from behind and followed up with further violence, driving his head into the ice and piling on him, initiating a dogpile. Not even close to a legitimate hockey play, well away from the puck, and with pretty clear intent to harm (maybe not to injure, but to harm).


Moore sued Bertuzzi, his team (the Canucks), and the NHL. Bertuzzi claimed that his coach had put a "bounty" on Moore, and that he hadn't intended to injure him -- just to get back at him for his hit on Naslund. Bertuzzi was suspended for a fairly long span of time, and his team was fined $250,000. The lawsuit was kind of on pause for a long time to gauge the long-term effects on Moore, but was eventually settled out of court (confidential terms).

All of this stuff is or course related to violence in hockey, but only loosely tied to fighting in hockey. Some would argue (with some merit in my opinion) that if the refs had called a penalty on Moore's hit on Naslund, and allowed a Vancouver player to challenge him to a fight at that time instead of the following game, it probably wouldn't have escalated to the level it did.

So, at least in my opinion, the league (NHL) needs to be careful, consistent, and fairly harsh in handing out penalties/suspensions to players who commit dangerous plays that can or do result in injuries -- especially repeat offenders. BUT, I think that allowing fighting can actually help mitigate that kind of stuff also -- as long as the league keeps it from getting out of hand and the enforcer type players continue to follow their "code".

In my opinion, the people who mercilessly shoot dogs are simply Wild-West enthusiasts who go out on a daily basis desperate for the opportunity to use their deadly weapon. It's an us-vs-them attitude, and it makes their own job harder, which makes them act tougher, compounding the problem. The spirit of the frontier lives on in the minds of these bullies, and even if they are in the minority it means that there are armed and dangerous psychopaths walking around with the protection of the state. And if you even consider defending yourself, you're being killed or sent away for the long haul.

Last two winters in Finland have been pretty black. Freezing in the night in to solid ice, melting during the day. There was a tiny sliver of cold air that arrived just days before christmas so it's white now, expecting to melt away before new year. Makes cycling pretty much impossible, they haul gravel on to the pavements, it falls thru the melting ice only to get trapped in it when the night comes and you got clear, solid sheet of ice again in the morning. I have never seen so much gravel in the streets in the spring as i did last year. Good news is that -20C only happens for two, three week tops.

Creepy or not it's damn good advice. I just about destroyed both my elbows hauling luggage up and down some of those damnable long staircases in the London underground.