You do really being obese (BMI 25-30) is the range to target for longest lifespan right?
25-30 is considered overweight, not obese. It used to be that <27.5 was considered normal but the standards were redefined in the late 90s.
If TFA is to be believed, his craft wouldn't meet the requirements of an ultralight aircraft:
103.1 Applicability.
This part prescribes rules governing the operation of ultralight vehicles in the United States. For the purposes of this part, an ultralight vehicle is a vehicle that:
[snip]
(e) If powered:
[snip]
(2) Has a fuel capacity not exceeding 5 U.S. gallons;
From TFA: According to court documents, Hughes rented a car and towed his gyrocopter from Florida to an airfield in Gettysburg, Pa. He chose the location for its proximity to the Capitol -- about an hour away and reachable on the aircraft's 10-gallon fuel tank -- and the fact that it was an uncontrolled airport, according to a criminal complaint.
You do realize the link you offered lists about twenty things that he did wrong? Here's the big one:
103.19 Operations in prohibited or restricted areas.
No person may operate an ultralight vehicle in prohibited or restricted areas unless that person has permission from the using or controlling agency, as appropriate.
But banning him from setting foot in the District of Columbia and talking about YEARS of prison time?
The banishment is part of his conditions of release and will expire whenever the criminal case is concluded. Nothing to see there. As far as "YEARS," well, the Federal Sentencing Guidelines don't have a specific section for this offense, so it falls under the other felony offenses section, which says that 18 U.S. Code 3553 is controlling.
Assuming he has no criminal record, my educated guess would be he stands a decent chance of doing no time. If he gets a prison sentence it will be 366 days, which is SOP is the Federal system because it gives the defendant a chance to earn early release. He'll also be required to forfeit the gyro-copter and any other property used in the commission of the offense, pay court costs, and possibly a fine.
Quite the contrary. He sent them a message a full hour in advance, saying that they should expect him.
The White House knew he was coming and expected him
You've got a lot of faith in Uncle Sam if you think the left hand (whomever reads info@barackobama.com) talks to the right hand (FAA, NORAD, USSS, and a few other agencies in the alphabet soup)
Heck, it's not even a Government address, it's BHO's campaign organization's address.
It's not a "ban" per say, it's a condition of his release pending trial. No different than the Judge telling you that you can't leave your house except for work, must submit to drug testing, or the myriad other requirements that are imposed on people who don't get pre-trial confinement. The alternative to accepting the conditions of release is to go to jail and sit there for a few months while the wheels of justice grind forward.
They obviously slipped a healthy dose of stupidity into whatever refreshing beverage was being consumed by the Seahawk's Head Coach and Offensive Coordinator.
From what I have heard they have been nothing but trouble.
Let me guess, problems with their electrical systems?
They need a warrant to perform any search or seizure—the warrant is the authorization to perform the search or seizure; you can't have one without the other. It isn't "either the search is 'reasonable' or you have a warrant", applying for a warrant is how you document that the search was reasonable in the first place, by providing probable cause supported by oath or affirmation. A blanket authorization for so-called 'reasonable' searches and/or seizures is just another way of issuing an unconstitutionally broad warrant which fails to document the probable cause or to particularly describe the place to be searched or the persons or things to be seized.
However, you are correct that they probably wouldn't have any trouble getting a warrant after his comments. If you make a credible threat, even if your intent was humorous or sarcastic, you shouldn't act surprised when people take you seriously.
I would also lament the what could have been part of Wikileaks, though I don't understand why it still can't be? What stops the people who were sidelined by Assange from simply "forking" the project and launching their own endeavor?
Feminists should try to solve woman's supression by religion (be it sharia or the church), and end practices like child prostitution or genital cutting. People who call themselves feminists should be ashamed that they dont solve these problems first. What do you think is morr important: forcing a womam into a physics course, or stop her from being crippled because some religion requires her to?
What do you think feminists (or anyone, for that matter) can realistically do about women living in oppressive conditions outside of the West? Are you willing to enlist for the army of occupation we'd need to send to the Middle East and Africa? I'm not. I doubt many feminists are either.
Why can't we just end this bullshit and let children grow up to do want they want to do?
Because that doesn't require any social engineering.
If they cared about that they'd find a better BDFL than Assange. Love him or hate him, he seems to be adept at making himself the story, which is the last thing you want if you're an organization like Wikileaks.
Heaven's Gate didn't commit suicide with poisoned beverages, they used phenobarbital, vodka, and plastic bags. You're thinking of the Jonestown cult.
Maybe they should have paid attention in kindergarten?
Neutrinos have bad breadth.
