Yes, completely impossible - except it's already been done, back in the 1960's.

from a DoD timeline, and frequently mentioned in a quick Google search:
1963 Nike Zeus tests demonstrated the system’s ability to intercept an ICBM warhead

An ABM is not a bullet - it can be radar-guided in to a point in front of the incoming ICBM, and meet up with it - then either directly impact it (kinetic kill) or use the old Nike technique of exploding a 5-megaton warhead in the general vicinity of the ICBM. Hey with 5-megatons, you don't need to hit it on the nose.

Re-read the post - he mentions blind people using blanks, so they can point a gun at a nearby attacker & fire, without much risk to anyone further away.

Also, a CCW entitles you to legally carry a weapon, not necessarily a gun - the details vary by state, but that may include a stun-gun, pepper-spray, knife, baton, you get the idea... A weapon that may normally be prohibited but is OK with a CCW permit. Some of those would be useful even if blind.

What does Kodak make these days? They are just a litigious patent company.

I don't know about that, they sell:
digital still cameras, digital video cameras, printers, printers, photo-related software, and retail photo kiosks.

Seems to be some real actual products there.

Car and Driver not relevant ? Perhaps you're thinking of Road & Track?

You could argue their automotive tastes, but I find their standardized instrumented testing to be very helpful. Their writing has gone downhill a bit the last few years, but they've always taken their testing seriously, and occasionally documented how they test. Their stock performance figures are the most reliable I've found.

Also, you lost me at Hot Rod being relevant... but I took a quick look at their website, and may have to check out a few issues - actually had some interesting technical articles. Last time I saw Hot Rod (80s/90s) it was all about $50K chrome/paint/supercharger customs, so I hadn't bothered with them for years.

Something that may be overlooked is/was AOL's "parental controls" , which used to be very handy for a family with children of varying ages. I used AOL for several years back in the early/mid-90s for just this reason, despite being fairly technical (developing commercial DOS/ Windows apps, some Unix work, in C/C++ & APL, and administering Novell & SQL servers).

I have no idea what their offerings are now, but being able to ratchet down the "sandbox" a young child had access to through the AOL client, or restrict them to only whitelisted contacts, was very handy. May not be needed by or thought of by younger singles, but very helpful to allow starting them off with relatively safe access & gradually expanding it as appropriate, or restricting it if they weren't behaving responsibly.

Again, in the past at least, an AOL address may have indicated any of: technical incompetence, a need for nationwide dial-up access while travelling, or simply a parent wanting easy-to-setup accounts for the kids.

I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!

Quite the vivid description - incredibly wrong, but very lively.

The PT Cruiser has an excellent rear suspension - very good handling for it's size/shape, especially on the highway. You could nit-pick the base suspension's body-roll on tight turns, but it can be rolled around curves briskly. They had to use a "flat" suspension to get the flat load floor - they actually picked a good design.

Interestingly, the European crash-tests rate the PT high for side-impact - but the American tests rate it poorly. The front-impact tests are the reverse. Depends on exactly how you test, I guess.

Have you ever driven a PT? I've driven PTs from 2001 & 2005, been impressed with the handling & brakes on both cars. My wife owns a 2005, reasonably reliable so far - needed an oxygen-sensor replaced, that's it so far.

In addition to banning gay marriage, should we reinstate the penalty for non-virgin brides?
Here you go: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+22:20-22&version=NIV
Personally, stoning seems a bit harsh, but hey - the Bible says! Save those wedding-night sheets as proof of virginity, kids!
Seriously, how many Christian brides would be killed if they stuck to their guns and stoned the non-virgins?

Lots of fun and odd stuff in Deuteronomy. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+22&version=NIV

In fact, I've violated the prohibition: Do not wear clothes of wool and linen woven together.

But I've never: Make tassels on the four corners of the cloak you wear.

Odd how most Christians cherry-pick the prohibitions, ignoring the ones that might affect them.

Does your house have a parapet around the roof? Better build one before condemning others:
When you build a new house, make a parapet around your roof so that you may not bring the guilt of bloodshed on your house if someone falls from the roof.

And whatever you do, live by this rule, it's guided many over the years: Do not plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together.

So what now? I am sitting at a red stoplight, which I know takes at least a minute to switch. I can't take 10 seconds to text someone that I'll be late? It's perfectly safe and the worst thing is that I'll get honked at if the light turns green before I pay attention. I have made a thoughtful, careful choice. Yet according to the law, I am as bad as a drunk driver.

Actually, according to the law, if you cause a fatal accident while texting you're as bad as a drunk driver.
If you're sitting at a red light, it would be difficult to cause a fatal accident; the only possibility I see is if you are hit by someone not expecting a car stopped at a green light, and that's arguably the fault of both drivers.
So don't text while moving, and you should be fine. Amazing concept I know, but seems to be the intent of the law.

An educated person who wished to express the concept you wish to convey, might very well say "this machine produces a noise level .05% of ambient noise in a quiet room"

When flaming someone else about their math, it helps to get your units right: .05% != 20x

Why not try the other way round:

Create your wiki, add pages, add links from your wiki pages (which you have full control over) to relevant wikipedia pages?

Much simpler, and should still produce the desired effect.

Maintained and added new features to uncommented APL code for the win!

Turned out the code did have comments, but they were helpfully stripped out by the lads at the head office before they sent us releases (took up interpreter RAM in the 640K PC days).

Why do you think a $600 box is needed to play WAR?

I've been playing WAR for several months on a 4-yr-old box (old office Dell P4 3GHz, with a $90 512MB ATI 2600 video card). Runs fine, night after night.

I did bump system memory from 1GB to 3 GB - that made a noticeable difference.

  If her system meets the minimum processor spec, just add some RAM & try popping in a recent video-card with 256-512MB. You may be surprised; my $120 of upgrades made a world of difference.

Here's the supposed system requirements:
        * 2.5 GHz P4 processor or equivalent
        * 1 Gigabyte RAM
        * A 128 MB Video Card, with support for Pixel Shader 2.0
        * At least 15 GB of hard drive space