R.Perry
Well-Known Member
Nice selfie, you wear those shoes on most construction sites and the safety people will be stomping on your toes.
Dealing with Confrontations
- Thread starter cyeung
- Start date
Phaedrus
Well-Known Member
I've got a pair of steel toed running shoes. Had more than one guy stomp my toes. These shoes have come a long ways, especially the composite toe boxes. Lighter and much easier for a long day.
Having flown a lot of government surveillance I know that once it starts it never stops, and constantly increases in scope regardless of legality. It becomes Orwell’s 1984 on steroids. The worst thing we could do is allow our government watching over the population, something they are already doing in many places. It begets a policy of total control.
R.Perry
Well-Known Member
Sorry Louis, I thought I posted that somewhere a while back. Professor Brandon Stark heads up the UAV department at the college, yes he did receive a part 39 waiver. However that waiver does not apply to my operation because I believe the Inspire 2 is too heavy.
Professor Stark has always been very helpful to me so if you have any questions contact him at UC Merced, CA. Sorry, I can't give out his phone number, but I'm sure if you go trough the college he will respond to you. Hope this helps. As for me, no flying over people.
Cheers
It's kind of like when I'm driving, if I see a cop car, I make sure I'm going the speed limit. If the government wants to watch me they are going to get very bored. With the exception of speed limits I try to obey the law, makes it easy to stay out of trouble that way.
To me observation isn't control. Here in California crime is out of control, I'm all for giving the cops whatever they need put a damper on crime.
Our local sheriff gives out conceal carry permits to anyone that isn't a felon, reason being, in my area we are on our own. We have two maybe three cops cover several hundred square miles. My wife and I carry 24/7, that's the world we live in.
I though we should put a donut shop close by then we could get faster response from our LEOs.
The problem with police “protection” is they do very little to protect. They react to crimes already committed or in progress. By the time they arrive on a crime in progress the actionable crime has already been done. At that point the police end up being report takers or on rare occasions pursue the suspects. Hence the benefit of concealed carry in this state. Other states allow open and concealed carry.
On our personal property, which includes rented property if it is your residence, open carry is 100% legal in this state if you can legally possess a firearm.
As for surveillance, we are much better off handling our own surveillance and security. Waiting for law enforcement or another agency to respond can be harmful or fatal from the delay. Of course any crime committed at the donut shop or after hours police bar will have better tesults[emoji6]
On our personal property, which includes rented property if it is your residence, open carry is 100% legal in this state if you can legally possess a firearm.
As for surveillance, we are much better off handling our own surveillance and security. Waiting for law enforcement or another agency to respond can be harmful or fatal from the delay. Of course any crime committed at the donut shop or after hours police bar will have better tesults[emoji6]
Dave Pitman
Well-Known Member
R.Perry
Well-Known Member
California has every wacko one can think of. Home invasion is always a concern, car jacking in certain areas is a reality, gangs are a very serious problem, sexual crimes are off the chart, we are loaded with rapist, and child molesters.
You handled it perfectly. I was on a job (which cost me a lot to get to) and when I got to the property and launched, the caretaker came out threatening to shoot down my bird. I landed it, we discussed, turned out the owner failed to inform him. I packed up and left and sent the owner a bill for expenses. Better not to confront. I had owner’s permission, a DROTAM, and military authorization, but it wasn’t worth the safety risk. There were bystanders and I wasn’t going to be indirectly responsible for any injuries.
Phaedrus
Well-Known Member
Huh. This is weird. California is 35/50 for rape.
Sexual assault follows a similar trend.
Forcible rape rate in the U.S. by state 2022 | Statista
Alaska saw the highest rape rate in the United States in 2022, with 134 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants.
www.statista.com
And 22/50 for overall crime
Crime rate by state U.S. 2020 | Statista
In 2020, the state with the highest crime rate in the United States per 100,000 inhabitants was New Mexico.
www.statista.com
Perhaps CA’s crime stats are now heavily under reported. Since our state government no longer prosecutes or incarcerates for what they call “petty” crimes they don’t get investigated and make the stats.
My daughter is an ADA specializing in felony and capital crimes for a county near you and she says crime is a lot higher than what is being reported.
For the victims what the state is calling “petty” isn’t petty at all, and they are obtaining no prosecutorial satisfaction. But the state is dumping criminals back on the streets to comply with federal prison population reduction mandates.
My daughter is an ADA specializing in felony and capital crimes for a county near you and she says crime is a lot higher than what is being reported.
For the victims what the state is calling “petty” isn’t petty at all, and they are obtaining no prosecutorial satisfaction. But the state is dumping criminals back on the streets to comply with federal prison population reduction mandates.
Last edited:
Phaedrus
Well-Known Member
??????Just for kicks, how are politicians classified? Criminals that haven’t been formally charged yet?
R.Perry
Well-Known Member
Huh. This is weird. California is 35/50 for rape.
Sexual assault follows a similar trend.
Forcible rape rate in the U.S. by state 2022 | Statista
Alaska saw the highest rape rate in the United States in 2022, with 134 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants.
And 22/50 for overall crime
Crime rate by state U.S. 2020 | Statista
In 2020, the state with the highest crime rate in the United States per 100,000 inhabitants was New Mexico.
Ever take a statistics class, statistics lie. The thing is if you are a victim you don't care what the statistics are, you want justice.
Phaedrus
Well-Known Member
True being a victim renders the probabilities moot. No argument. But that does not change the larger picture. I contracted a brain tumor that affects 1 in 1 million people in this country each year (~300 people per year). Sucked for me. However, my bad luck still does not change the fact that the odds are still 1 in 1 million.
And yes, I've taken more than a few statistics courses, along with upper level math courses. "Statistics lie" is something people say who don't like what the numbers are telling them. Sorry that the actual numbers don't match your perception, but to claim the numbers are wrong simply for that reason is a poor argument.
And yes, I've taken more than a few statistics courses, along with upper level math courses. "Statistics lie" is something people say who don't like what the numbers are telling them. Sorry that the actual numbers don't match your perception, but to claim the numbers are wrong simply for that reason is a poor argument.
Statistics are but a product of the data set in use at the time, along with how that data is prioritized. Lacking complete data, any conclusion is false.
Phaedrus
Well-Known Member
Which is why every statistical analysis I know of does a data quality review. With respect to crime statistics, which are not really the results of any analysis, but rather are simply reporting data sets, it would be unreasonable to assume that the error rate in one state is significantly different from another state. So while the absolute magnitude might be open to question, the relative sorting would not.
And again, rejecting something simply because you do not like what it says without otherwise proving the numbers to be invalid is a poor foundation for an argument.
And again, rejecting something simply because you do not like what it says without otherwise proving the numbers to be invalid is a poor foundation for an argument.
