Well, there's always alcoholism.

Barring inclement weather, if all the commercial planes are grounded so that traffic is not an issue, it should be well possible to land planes visually for a purpose like bringing in the experts to fix the situation.

Sounds like miscegenation to me.

I got curious and did a little research. Rosa Parks did not sit in the back of the bus in the "black" section. She sat in the first row of the "colored" section. The row became illegal when the driver demanded that the "colored" section be made smaller. So. Neither of us are entirely correct, although I think my original statement is closer to the spirit of what she did.

Maybe you should have just corrected my sig.

You can record for some purposes if you post a sign, in some states.

No. You have an expectation of privacy there. Hotels with signs about video surveillance have still gotten busted when staff recorded people in the bathroom.

Again, varies by state, both on and off the phone.

I don't know if this just works for me because I'm a giant mutant, but if I make a deep sort of dog-growly noise way down in my sternum then it makes my skull vibrate in a way that lets me visually perceive flicker all the way up to around typical LED refresh rates even on normal stuff like digital clocks. The numbers all sort of jiggle in different directions, in that case. LED-illuminated Christmas trees look ridiculous. They have absurd flicker because they just run at 1/2 of the mains frequency.

They're always crying about how poorly freddie and fannie are doing but they could, say, pay off all the student loans for less than the price of a bailout, or bail out a bunch of these actual homeowners directly rather than giving people actual cash. So yeah, it's all a lot of cockery.

the two words mean different things. was doing something else.

if there's pines there it's because they wanted them there

broken window

No, I suggest that you do that. In most of the BLM land, there's long since no native trees.

This is my understanding of the tripod issue. Definitely not weight, who cares about that? It's the legs spreading around, and the attitude that people have. You let those things in, you'd be surprised at what jerks people can be. OK, back country, nobody's gonna know. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about right below Bridalveil falls on a warm Sunday afternoon. It's crowded already. We don't need your tripod.

Now of course you could just pass a rule "not to be disruptive" as others have suggested. Problem? It'd be at the discretion of the rangers. Disputes would arise. Ranger: "His tripod and long lens were taking up space, and he was there for an hour trying to catch the light, telling people to move". Photog: "There's no rule against tripods or long lenses, and people with iPhones tell others to move sometimes too". And so on and so forth. It's easier just to ban certain types of equipment. I'm not saying it's the best way to handle it. It's just the reality of how laws and rules work. They're blunt instruments.

That's why a lot of people, even officials, will go "wink, wink, just do this" even though it's against the rules. Taking your tripod and some trash bucket lenses up to a peak at 3 AM for sunrise shots? Technically it might be against the rules but you won't bother anybody. You might even be able to sell the pictures for quite a while before anybody notices; but if you start making a name for yourself or disrupting popular spots, you're going to have to play by the rules.

It turns out that bash was JavaScript before JavaScript was cool.

I don't know the particulars of your state's arrangement. I know that the BLM awards permits on fairly specious bases, however, and does not do a particularly ecologically-friendly job of "managing" the land.

They're basically farming those trees on our land, at our expense since the prevailing rate would be much higher.

Santa Cruz and Kelseyville actually, so better and worse respectively. The Santa Cruz Mission is just up the hill as you go from downtown to the East side. Now I live on in a town named after a man whose wife is reputed to have poured water in the gunpowder to help the natives rise up and kill her slaving, murdering, raping husband. Ah, American history.

To suggest that the government is a single entity which has a right to dispense with that which belongs to all of us is disingenuous at best.

Our government has a right to that authority which we the people grant it, no more. But that land is meant to be for public use, and is being monetized to the detriment of the public.