Senator Collins ought to know better. Her state, where I reside with my family, is all too familiar with driving toe-to-toe with over the road truckers, as 95 slices our state in half going N/S and is the only way for many of us to 'get there from here', as they say in Maine. These truckers also branch out to the 2-lane, secondary highways that run E/W because of the ruralness of this state. Couple fatigue with often inclement driving conditions in our long winter season, and it's a disaster waiting to happen. I hopped on I-95 at noon today to take a student to a medical appt. and was boxed in by 2 18-wheelers amid snow and slush and slippery roads, reducing my visibility to near zero. Imagine if this trucker was dozing. Susan, what ARE you thinking??
Ms. Goode, you might wan to see the abstract of the rule the ATF submitted last year, " Background Checks for Principal Officers of Corporations, Trusts, and Other Legal Entities With Respect to the Making or Transferring of a National Firearms Act Firearm", RIN 1140-AA43 for a suggestion of what the ATF's thinking is of closing the "loophole." The abstract suggests that it would treat the owners of trusts as "responsible persons" who would be subject to the same background checks and finger printing requirements for individuals filling out a Form 4, although it would waive the CLEO sign-off requirement, instead requiring the application to merely be forwarded to the local CLEO. This would at least guarantee full background checks on any trustee or beneficiary of a gun trust and also appears to be a fairly reasonable compromise on CLEO sign-offs (which, as you noted, many CLEOs refuse to provide to anyone even if they are in a state that allows legal civilian ownership of NFA registered firearms) by eliminating the requirement while still courtesy copying the CLEO (who of course could investigate the applicant if he or she has reason to believe the applicant is otherwise disqualified from owning NFA firearms).
We're already dealing with issues on a State by State basis. Marijuana laws are being enacted all over the country. The problem with this approach, in areas such as marijuana and guns, comes from a lack of consistency. And that will continue as long as each state writes its own laws. Back in the 70's my states drinking age was 21 while next door (6 miles away) it was 18. Beer runs were the normal, as was driving to that state to drink (and often home, drunk). Apply that to pot, or guns, and you can see the problem. I'm not being critical of this new law, just reminding everyone that to be meaningfully effective all states will need to be on the same page. And that will be a tough slog.
If everything else is considered acceptable behavior while driving, then so should texts.Only if the keyboard is not functional manually while driving, negating the heads down eyes off the road.
I'm confused! In the abstract of the study, the scientists state that the low carb participants were directed to eat 40g or less of carbohydrate a day, an amount low enough to be really restrictive (to achieve it, you have to be really careful about nuts, fruit, and some vegetables). You say they ate 127g, an amount that would likely result from eating freely within the guidelines you describe. Why the discrepancy? Was there a difference between the scientists' instructions and the participants' behavior? Or was one a mistake?Thanks in advance!
Don't let him buy something neither of you can afford. How did I do it? 4 years in the Air Force, 2 years at a community college, 2 at a state school, 4 at a state medical school. Would I have liked to go to SU, or Princeton? sure. For me, a lesson in, "You can't have everything you want". Private school? Sure, I'd like a BMW like all the trust funders... But I'm driving a VW.