Actually the vast majority of business owners tell their employees to "give 'em the money" when confronted by a bad guy with a gun, knowing that resistance is more likely to result in tissue damage and/or death for the employee. Probably good advice for anyone. Which is more valuable? Life or money. Or your gun.

Me, too, ole sarg. Going after the 1st amendment is a collective delusion of NRA toadies. As is the notion that anyone has much of a chance of fending off a bad guy.

In August last year, two cops were confronted with a bad guy at fairly close range. They fired a total of 16 shots, hit the bad guy with 7--and wounded 9 innocent pedestrians. Seems to me there is something to be learned here.

Gun manufacturers by far. Where does NRA get the money to wag Congress like a dog wags it tail? NRA has about 4 mil members, just a little over 1% of the country's population. Probably 10% of what you paid for your AK 47 went into NRA lobby purse.

Show me a corporation CEO who doesn't like a shovelful of government handout.

Yeah! Let's hear it for preventive execution!

Red River offers some icc profiles for a variety of printers and papers. Check their website.

Wrong! Adam Lanza was not a criminal until AFTER he pulled the trigger. Criminals are us--until they commit a criminal act.

Keep in mind that these stories probably reflect only some details of what happened and those aren't always correct. For example, Stella was not driving; her nephew was. And above all, remember that these awards were all made by a jury composed of folks just like you and me.

And you would probably be surprised at how many of these awards were modified or taken away entirely by the judge who can do that.

And I thought tilting at windmills had gone out of fashion. No wonder that the anti-Obama side lost the election

Yes!

Remember what great photographer Ansel Adams taught us. The negative (read digital file) is the score; the print is the performance. Through careful darkroom work, I have occasionally been able to make a creditably print from a seriously handicapped negative. It is even easier to do this with a digital file and a good editing program. Even the icc profile for the specific paper you are using is editing. Anything but the RAW file involves editing. Taking the picture is an art. Editing it another art. Why not utilize both? Can you avoid utilizing both?

Never went to bed with an ugly woman.

But I sure have woke up with a few.

I agree totally

[quote=ted45][quote=Fstop12


Malpractice insurance is not the boogyman the press would have us believe, but let's assume you are correct. Who is responsible for all of those malpractice lawsuits? If those lawsuits are the blame for the high cost of health care then who is responsible for the high cost of health care?[/quote]

From American Association for Justice:
"One of the principal myths surrounding medical malpractice is its effect on overall health care costs. Medical malpractice is actually a tiny percentage of health care costs, in part because medical malpractice claims are far less frequent than many people believe.
In 2004, the CBO calculated malpractice costs amounted to “less than 2 percent of overall health care spending. Thus, even a reduction of 25 percent to 30 percent in malpractice costs would lower health care costs by only about 0.4 percent to 0.5 percent, and the likely effect on health insurance premiums would be comparably small.” i

Five years later, the CBO revisited the issue of medical negligence costs. This time, they attempted to account for the indirect costs of medical negligence, mainly the idea that doctors order extra tests to avoid liability. Again, the CBO found that tort reform would only save 0.5 percent of all health care costs."