Edward

Uh...do you really believe that marijuana would be any easier to find if it were legal? If so, you must live in an unusual area... Well, gee, Jazzmoose, maybe not everyone is as well connected as you. But, uh..., anyway, who said anything about "finding" marijuana? I have known people who would have liked to use marijuana but did not because their employers proscribed it (and conducted drug testing). This obviously would not have been an issue if marijuana had been legal.

I think that you interpreted correctly the Constitution's emendament about arms. I think that at times the proposal of it was exactly to prevent the taking over from undemocratic federal government against single states. That is pretty obvious, considering that Jefferson and the Others lived in an epoch were undemocratic centralized Kingdoms ruled the world. A federation of armed free states (with the milicia) was the better cure for that. And the right to carry arm has more to do with it then with personal selfdefense. How ironic that Hamilton won the battle against Jefferson in the long run and today we have the more invasise and centralizad federal control over the country but the freedom to enteer in a shop and buy an assault gun. Porcy62, I do not quite agree with your assessment of the Second Amendment, but I do believe that you have to look elsewhere (i.e., the Ninth Amendment) to find support for the right to keep firearms for self-defense.

I suspect it would remain the same. I don't think incidents like this are either encourged or discouraged by the gun control regime. Nor, for that matter, any other generalised social/cultural situation. Some people are just sick. If something can be done about those individuals (and in many cases I would guess that does happen), fine. But to expect every one of those people to be identified before they do something horrendous is asking too much of society. MG MG MG, do you really believe that there is no correlation between the availability of some thing and the frequency of use of that thing? Do you think that the same exact number of people would use prostitutes if prostitution were made legal? Do you think that the same exact number of people would use marijuana if it were made legal? Now, I completely agree that, unfortunately, no matter what the law proscribes, there are always going to be some people who will be able to get their hands on exactly what they need to commit heinous crimes. However, why are you convinced that these nutters are so resourceful that, in EVERY instance, they would be able to get what they wanted (and you suggest as much by stating that gun control laws are of little consequence in these instances)? How many mass shooting incidents have occurred within the United States over the last 30 years utilizing classes of weapons whose possession has been outlawed (such as fully automatic weapons, hand grenades, flamethrowers, etc.)? Do you think it possible, then, that effective gun laws might (and do in some countries) force at least some of these nutters to take different steps (resulting in less carnage) in pursuing their aims, if not reconsider their plans altogether? If U.S. citizens were (and had been going back 50 years) limited to legally owning no firearms other than one five-shot revolver and one shotgun, do you think that, at the very least, fewer people would have been killed by these nutters in shooting incidents over the years? In this regard, do you think it might be wise if high capacity (let's say greater than 10 rounds) ammunition clips were deemed illegal? Also, do you think it would be wise if other states followed California's lead and ban the possession of .50 caliber rifles? Or does none of this matter in the least?

Why? It's perfectly rational. Let's start with how Rousseau's 'Social Contract' -- you relinquish certain rights in exchange for personal protection by the state -- is seriously flawed. Now dialing Blacksburg S. VA........ring, ring, ring.... No state undertakes that, Weizen. The arguments for and against gun control are almost certainly irrelevant in relation to an incident like this. Talk about gun control in relation to armed robbery or drive-by shootings. Britain has probably the most restrictive gun control regime in the world, but it doesn't stop incidents like those at Hungerford in 1987 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungerford_Massacre or Dunblane in 1996 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_Massacre Basically, in these cases, we're dealing with nutters, not rational people like criminals and gang members. MG MG, If gun control legislation in the United Kingdom mirrored that of the United States, do you think that the occurrence of tragedies similar to the two that you note above would?: A. increase, B. decrese, or C. stay exactly the same Thanks!

It wouldn't prevent things like this from happening, but it would probably reduce their frequency. (Not a judgment on the moral merit of various gun control laws.) Anyway, I'm done here for the next few days... too early to turn a tragedy into a political football. Guy I completely agree. Scott, surely you see the flaws in your original argument: If the guy had his mind set on it as much as he obviously did, he would have found out a way to carry out his plan no matter what kind of weapons he would have had to resort to. Do you really think that he could have killed over 30 people so easily without resorting to firearms? Yes, I suppose that he could have constructed a bomb or committed arson, but I think that would have taken a lot more effort and planning. Maybe, then, he would have just killed himself alone and let everyone else be. Moreover, by this train of reasoning, could you not also argue that we should not restrict shoulder-launched SAM's because if someone is really intent on bringing down a plane they will find a way to do it? The whole point of gun control is to make it more difficult for some people to acquire firearms (as well as forbid civilian ownership of certain weapons altogether). On another note, the distinction drawn between "assault" style and other weapons is meaningless. The important things to consider are the range of the weapon and its ability to penetrate (body armor, bulletproof glass, etc.). The family of a peace officer who is killed at long range by a bolt-action rifle (I have a friend in the OC Sheriff's Department who knew someone who was murdered in such a manner by someone with a "regular" hunting rifle) certainly is not consoled by the ban on assault-style weapons. Yes, I know that handguns, not rifles, were used to commit this atrocity. Also, for the record, I do believe that the ownership of certain types of firearms (for self-protection purposes) is provided by the Constitution. At any rate, I have said too much already - as Guy noted, it is far too soon for all of this.

Then again, there are many who treat it as a forced savings plan. Extra money in the paycheck has a tendancy to get spent and a lot of people don't have the discipline to save. That tax refund may be the only reason some have money in a savings account or have that money to get a new car or pay for that vacation. When you think about the pitiful amount of interest you'd earn in a savings account to keep funds liquid and accessable hassle-free, you're not really going to be missing out on much. I completely agree with your assessment that many folks use their tax refunds as a forced savings plan. I always laugh, though, when I hear the same friends, year after year, gleefully talk about how much money they are getting back from the government. JLarsen and Harold Z are right on - if you are getting a significant amount of money back, then you have not managed your finances as well as you could have. I also agree that, after factoring in federal and state taxes, most people stand to gain little from putting money into savings accounts or interest bearing checking accounts. For instance, if you are paying the top federal and state marginal rates (35% for Federal and 9.3% for California), then 4% interest earned on such investments becomes approximately 2.2% after taxes. Still, it is better than nothing. (BTW, ING Direct presently offers about 4.5% on its savings accounts and 4.0% minimum on its checking accounts. ING still has a promotion in effect whereby you get $25 if you open a savings account with at least $250. If you do open such an account, make sure that you allow a friend who already has an ING account refer you since this person would then get a $10 referral placed in his/her account.) However, relatively few people should be keeping much of their money in traditional savings/checking accounts. If you are talking about an "Emergency Fund" (i.e., three months' pay), I would keep no more than one month's pay in an interest bearing checking/savings account, and then put the balance into a relatively low-risk, no-load mutual fund with a low expense rate. Such an investment is quite readily accessible via electronic funds transfer. I, for one, keep about two months' pay in Homestead Value (HOVLX) because (1) the initial investment amount was only $500, (2) the expense rate is only 0.76%, (3) the fund has earned an annualized rate of approximately 9.9% over the past ten years (the annualized return over the preceding 1-, 3-, and 5-year periods is greater), (4) it is relatively low-risk (Morningstar rates it as having average risk, but the fund value decreased minimally during the last bear market), (5) the fund manager has been around for a while (i.e., ~5 years - I actually would prefer a longer tenure, but I decided to make an exception here), and (6) I can easily add and withdraw funds via the Internet. Now, I am NOT pushing Homestead Value in particular, but certainly there are other mutual funds (most people probably should choose a no-load fund) with similar attributes that could serve an investor well. The upshot is that mutual funds generally offer increased rates of return, the opportunity for deferred gain (be wary of mutual funds that make a lot of dividend distributions as these will be taxed at ordinary rates), and preferential capital gains treatment (15% Federal) if the money is kept in the account for more than one year prior to withdrawal. If you have little tolerance for risk (and there are plenty of good reasons why this may be the case), however, you should probably keep most/all of your money in savings/checking accounts, high-grade bonds, and similar investments. Also, I realize that some people (e.g., JLarsen ) are not particularly crazy about mutual funds, but I firmly believe that they are, at the very least, a good investment vehicle for those funds that you may need to access on short notice. (Actually, I have done quite well with my mutual fund investments (knock on wood), but if I had the time to research matters adequately I would definitely invest more in individual stocks).

Aside from the correct observation that there appears to be a history of the foul calling being just a little biased in favor of the higher seeded teams, I think that the PAC-10 and the BIG-10 are at a bit of a disadvantage come tournament time because their teams are used to playing more physical games within their conferences. How many three-point plays did the Gators make during that second half against UCLA? As for Florida beating the Bruins, I cannot say too much when Affalo pulls his disappearing act once again. Yes, there were some bogus foul calls made against him early, but he can NOT disappear during big games. This is not to take anything away from Brewer, who had a great all around game. However, Shipp did not seem to have much trouble scoring on him in the first half (I am afraid that he exerted so much effort carrying the team that he was exhausted for the second half). Afflalo needs to take out an insurance policy and stay in school for his senior year. If I were an NBA scout, I would have far too many reservations about this All-American. Noah is an extremely over-rated player, and he would have done well to bolt for the NBA after last season. I don't see a slender, 6-11 forward type being all that effective in the NBA, especially without the courtesy of the officials' whistles. (And, please, do not forgot how often the referees swallowed their whistles last season when he was setting a dubious record for most blocked shots in a championship game. It might have been the difference if the Bruins had actually decided to show up.) Billy Packer is an idiot and a cheerleader, and he should be relegated to providing commentary only for ACC and SEC conference games. I remember the Bruins' last championship win against Arkansas when Packer kept crying throughout the game, "Oh, the Bruins are getting tired. Arkansas is coming on strong now." What a joke! I scoff at any notion that this Florida team (and I will give credit where credit is due - it is a very good team) is the best championship team of all time. Puh-lease! There are a number of teams in the modern era (let alone the Bruin dynasty era) that could have more than held its own against Florida. <end rant>

Soulstation wins some RVG money! I may have won the pool, but I feel like the C student who aced the final. Edward's pickin' was way more impressive. Thanks, Quincy, but one could easily argue that it is an extremely difficult task to pick the finalists and the winner. Still, I would never lay any serious money on a NCAA pool utilizing Yahoo! because the later rounds, IMHO, are too heavily weighted.

Thanks for the clarification. Since these reissues appear to have been remastered by Toshiba engineers, I know all that I need.

Thanks, for the informative response. Would you happen to know, though, the difference, if any, between different 5XXX releases of the same title? For instance, Birth of the Cool was reissued as both 5301 and 5953.

The "Blue Note Works" TOCJ-15XX, TOCJ-16XX, TOCJ-40XX, TOCJ-41XX, TOCJ-42XX and TOCJ-43XX series were all mastered by Toshiba engineers, not by McMaster. Thanks, Hans. These things are really flying off of the shelves, so if there is something that you are considering purchasing, I suggest that you order it as quickly as possible.

Can anyone tell me the difference between the TOCJ 5300 and 5900 series? For instance, I see The Birth of the Cool available as both TOCJ-5301 and TOCJ-5903. Similarly, there are three different TOCJ-5000's for Modern Art by Art Pepper. Also, are any of the TOCJ series remastered by Ron McMaster? Thanks!

I need UCLA over Georgetown in order to win it all. Of course, I would gladly forego any monetary gain in exchange for the Bruins winning another NCAA championship (it would be the 12th in men's hoops and the 100th overall). Both semifinal games should be great. I am, obviously, EXTREMELY interested in the UCLA-Florida game. I know that the vast majority of people are picking Florida, BUT: 1) This UCLA squad is a better defensive unit (and, with Shipp, potentially more explosive offensively) than last year's team. 2) Yes, losing Hollins hurt, but I think that Collison is an improvement over Farmar in almost every respect (except for the intangibles category - I would rather have the ball in Farmar's hands if the Bruins were down by one with time expiring), and Shipp more than offsets the loss of Bozeman. Moreover, this squad is a year more mature, and everyone on the team has had a year to think about what happened in last year's championship game. In that game, Farmar played well, Hollins and Bozeman played okay, and everyone else played horribly. Additionally, Howland was out-coached by Donovan, and that has got to be eating at him. 3) Florida just does not look as impressive as it did last year. Last year, Georgetown was the only team to lose to Florida by less than a double-digit margin, but this year, three of Florida's four opponents have been in the game until the final few minutes. If Florida beats UCLA, then I would pick them to win it all again, with all due respect to fans of Georgetown and the Ohio State University.

Thanks, guys. With the scoring weighted as it is at the Yahoo site, the next two rounds will make or break all of us. I am presently tied for first in one of my pools at work (I didn't select Vandy over WA ST. in that one, unfortunately), and I am in second in the other one (a "Seed-8" pool in which you select eight teams and receive points based upon the number of wins that your teams tally - for instance, two wins by USC, a #5 seed, gets you 10 points).

I sent an e-mail to the address that you specified. Thanks!

The Lou Blackburn and Three Sounds CD's are no longer available.

I noticed a few duplicates while going through my collection the other day. All CD's are factory sealed. Quoted prices include shipping via USPS First Class Mail (international shipping costs would have to be calculated). Please send me a PM if interested - thanks! Lou Blackburn - Complete Imperial Sessions (Blue Note 58294) - XXX Lud Gluskin - 1924-33 (Jazz Oracle BDW 8045 - 2-CD set) - XXX Edmond Hall - Petite Fleur (Mighty Quinn MQP1106) - $8.00 ON HOLD Three Sounds - Good Deal (Blue Note TOCJ-4020) - XXX XXX = GONE

NOJ, You accidentally chose San Diego AND New England while failing to pick the winner for the Chicago-Seattle game.

Thanks! Green Bay came through for me in a meaningless game. Hopefully, Brett will come back for one more year. Considering the sorry state of the NFC, the Packers probably would not have much trouble making the playoffs next year with Brett at the helm.

Whatever you desire. If we do tie as winners, however, you certainly can have the booty. I need another CD like a hole in the head.

Hey, guys, PLEASE TAKE NOTE that the Pittsburgh-Baltimore game is being played in Pittsburgh (which got blown out in the previous game that these two teams played in Baltimore).

Do you like Roland Kirk's version more than Aretha Franklin's? Harry Connick, Jr. performs a great solo piano (without vocals) version of "Tie a Yellow Ribbon 'Round the Ole Oak Tree" on his album, 30.

I just posted them - it's been a hectic week.

SS1, if you want to reassume your role as score keeper that is just fine with me because I think that you have been doing a great job. However, your season to date totals through Week #10 included one small error (Conn500 was 84-60, not 83-61); and your season to date totals through Week #11 are off. Again, there were 144 games played through Week #10, and 160 games played through Week #11. Your totals indicate that there were 145 games played through Week #11. Please trust me on this. I have re-calculated everyone's win totals through Week #11 using your weekly totals, and the tallies that I present towards the top of the previous page are correct.

Please refer to my post near the top of this page for updated totals. Thanks!