leahcim

It is a great way to travel.

I do not think it is illegal to pass, but most states have laws that you must give a safe passing distance. Usually it is three feet. I generally ride as far to the right as is safely possible. However, if there is no shoulder--such as crossing the route 37 bridge to Seaside--I will take the entire right lane. In that case there are three traffic lanes but no designated bike lane. The lanes are very narrow, and if I stay to the right some idiot will try to pass me within the lane and likely kill me. If I take the entire right lane it forces drivers to change lanes and pass safely.

Bicycle is treated as a vehicle, vehicles should be using the vehicular traffic lanes not sidewalks. "39:4-14.1 Rights and Duties of Persons on Bicycles. Every person riding a bicycle on a roadway is granted all the rights and subject to all of the duties of the motor vehicle driver." I ride bicycles all the time and nothing bothers me like seeing other cyclists ignoring the rules of the road. Well, getting hit or harassed by idiots in cars--when I am legally operating a bicycle in accordance with NJ law--that bothers me more.

Yes, in my experience, New Yorkers are quite friendly and direct. It is the New Jersey people who are A holes ;-) Present company excluded of course I grew up in Washington (north of Seattle) and I do understand what you are saying--people have a faux politeness, try to avoid confrontation and be agreeable vs. the directness on the east coast. But I moved the east about 25 years ago, and things have changed quite a bit in the PNW. We got the influx of Californians in the late 1980s--paying cash for houses and driving the market way way up. So I still blame those transplants for all the bad things that happen in Washington.

And consider quality of life. I am biased, but I always feel the west coast, especially PNW, people are much friendlier, the climate is mild, I love the mountains, forest, and natural areas out there; and the PNW/Alaska seafood is hard to beat. And I believe that even ultrliberal Washington and Oregon still have better gun laws than PRNJ. Although Washington is chipping away at them.

Several people in the article say that he was such a "good kid." What do you think his intentions toward his girlfriend might have been? Was he just breaking down doors as maybe a creative way to propose? Birthday gift? I wonder what would have been the result if he had got the right apartment and found his girlfriend.

I would hope so. State v Martinez affirmed the right to "meet the assailant at the threshold of the home and prevent him from entering by any means, including deadly force." And this guy was way beyond the threshold. But Martinez decision is almost 30 years old. And I can imagine an anti-gun prosecutor trying to make a name and pursuing this.

So if this were to occur in PRNJ, would the shooter be screwed because he was "safe" behind a locked door and because he shot through the door, not identifying the threat and did not wait for the threat to actually enter his "secured" (locked) room?

If I can't pay cash for a car, I'm not buying it. And $75K for a car?? how much is insurance on that? But I really don't care what I drive as long as it is safe, reliable, and comfortable. And I hate to spend a lot of cash on a depreciating asset. But if it makes you happy to give up some nice, paid-for hardware and pay interest to someone else, then you should do it.

Yeah, never know if properly concealed. In the Slate story it sounds like Horton was trying to CC, but apparently did not do a good job of it. As for OC, I did not ask why--I would probably not OC in any state. Question is what would happen here to someone engaged in the legal activity of carrying not brandishing a firearm on their land in NJ? Do you think that would work out well?

Yes you are correct, if it is indeed an assumption. The Slate article states that "At the time of the search, the officers only knew that a man with a gun was inside of a house." I am assuming the statement by Slate was researched and is correct. Maybe not a good assumption with Slate? But how do you think NJ LE would react if they drive by your house and you are on the porch with a concealed HG, or mowing the lawn with an OC?

Seems like the Illinois' case of Markell Horton could easily happen in NJ right now. One can legally carry on one's land in NJ. In the Illinois' case, Horton was carrying on his front porch; Horton was legally prohibited from carrying due to felonies, but the Police did not know that at the time and would have acted the same even if he was legal. So what do you think would happen if the law drives by your house in NJ, you are sitting on the porch and they think they see a 1911 in your waistband? On at least two occasions patrol officers have come around the back of my home when no one answered the door. Both occasions they just had questions about one of my neighbors, but I wonder how they would react if I was holding a HG, say engaged in breaking it down for cleaning?

I received the Ooma unit last Friday. Installation was easy. I requested number port on Friday afternoon. In the meantime I forwarded Nettalk to the Ooma number. I got an email Monday saying my port was scheduled for Tuesday. My number was disconnected for a few hours Tuesday afternoon, and working with Ooma by evening. Service and quality has been good so far. And I was pleasantly surprise to get human customer service when I called with a question and very fast response to email questions. Very different from Nettalk, where I have found it impossible to get human customer service, and even email/"chat" takes a long time for a response. And it integrates with the Amazon Echo. So far I am pretty happy with the features and service--especially that it does not seem to drop calls and QoS seems better.

Yeah. I really wanted to like it, and it was fine--good enough--for years. And I did not mind the lack of customer support too much--until I needed it. So I don't want to completely trash NT. The one thing I did not try is switching from Wifi to wired. Maybe that would have solved some of the issues. And when I realized they started enforcing the 1500 minutes, that nudged me to make the change.

I have had Nettalk for about 4 years. It had been just ok, but good luck if you have problems and ever want to talk to a live person. I have had issues on and off over the years. Rarely do I get a response from Nettalk. I stuck with it because it was good enough. I had issues last October where incoming calls were hit-or-miss. And the misses would usually just get a busy or a message saying "Wireless caller is not available" It would not even go to voicemail! Recently I have had issues with dropped calls and frequently have to reset the device. And I found out they have a 1500 minute per month limit on outbound calls. I am not sure if they just started enforcing it, but I am pretty sure I hit it this month (well, not me per se, now I get a message telling me to add credits to my account when I try to dial out). I tried the Chat help--no one is there. Said they will get back to me, three days later and still no response. So I just ordered Ooma from Amazon (was on sale for $79.99) and it should arrive tomorrow. The reviews look decent--definitely better than Nettalk has been, I will report back after a few months. I will probably do the basic plan, which is about the same cost as Nettalk ($4/month). Ooma also has a limit at 5000 minutes outbound per month, but claim they don't enforce it unless you are running a call center out of the house. It cannot be worse than Nettalk, especially if they have live people when you need support. I also like the fact that Ooma will interface with Amazon Echo (Alexa) for calling and IFTTT to announce calls through Hue or Wemo devices. And I believe I can use the Ooma app over wifi on my Smartphone too. Newtonian: Ooma also advertises a business plan starting at $19.95/month.

Would it fit in a soft guitar case? Golf bag? Or something that is obviously a case for something else?

You "owe" the government your tax money no matter what. It does not matter when you pay (well, there can be penalties if you under pay by too much). You are not liable to pay any more or less than what you owe (based on a simple formula and a very complex system of deductions, credits, and "loopholes"). You can overpay or underpay during the year by having too much or too little withheld from every paycheck. At the end of the year, you file a tax return and settle up with the govt for the difference. If you could pay nothing all year, and just pay the one lump sum on 4/15, you essentially have a short-term loan from the govt until you pay the bill. If you get $10K back, well then you have just given the govt a short term, no interest loan for $10K. Whether you owe or they owe, you still pay the same amount--unless you owe too much and then they will assess a penalty.

Way to go Glenn, no sense handing over all that cash to Comcast! I get Internet from Comcast (only option I have) TV is 100% OTA (I am about 50 miles from the Philadelphia broadcast antennas and I get decent reception). I use NetTalk for phone ($40 or $50 per year). How has Ooma been for those who are using it? I am thinking of switching because I have occasional issues with NetTalk--people get busy signal, or it goes directly to voicemail, or I have to reset it occasionally. And their customer service is pretty bad. It has not been so bad that I have cancelled it yet, but I think about it.

I would say that a backpack would qualify as a "closed and fastened case" or a "securely tied package." And nothing about separating the ammunition (I believe that may be part of FOPA though, for interstate travel).That being said, it is not a bad idea to err on the side of caution. In case you encounter an LEO that does not know the law (read Blue Tent Sky). While you may be in the right, it may cost you $10K-$20K to prove your innocence. Best strategy is to drive safe and not get pulled over.

My reading of our convoluted code says it is fine. Guns unloaded (magazines full but not in the guns), NO LOCKS REQUIRED. 2C:39-6 g. All weapons being transported under paragraph (2) of subsection b., subsection e., or paragraph (1) or (3) of subsection f. of this section shall be carried unloaded and contained in a closed and fastened case, gunbox, securely tied package, or locked in the trunk of the automobile in which it is being transported, and in the course of travel shall include only such deviations as are reasonably necessary under the circumstances. The only mention of locking is within the trunk of an automobile, and in that case the language uses an OR which means on or the other (or all) of the four options presented. Read the law and make your own choices, consult an attorney if you do not feel comfortable. I have done it on a bicycle many times.

I am in the Southwest and it is colder here than NJ! Even had rain all day yesterday. Today is back to normal level of sun, but cool.

This is the study that says it is better to merge like a douchebag rather than merging early--at least for traffic flow. It may not be as safe, especially when you factor in road ragers. https://www.cars.com/articles/2014/05/the-zipper-merge-convincing-motorists-isnt-a-snap/ Instead, states that ask motorists to use the zipper method want all available roadway used up to the merge point. The zipper is not intended to be used when traffic is flowing briskly, with ample distance between vehicles to move over earlier without causing a slowdown. But when traffic is slow moving, using both lanes and taking turns one car at a time from each lane has proved effective. MnDOT says by creating two full lanes of traffic, the speed difference between the lanes is reduced. When everyone is equally "disadvantaged," incidents of road rage and other bad behavior — like playing "lane cop" and driving in the center to prevent passing — are fewer. Signs instructing motorists to use both lanes up to the merge point help take the pressure off people who fear scorn or retribution.

I actually saw a study where they determined that it is actually better for traffic flow if people wait until the last possible minute to merge. I can't remember the details, but I suppose having more traffic lanes for as long as possible. They were talking about putting up signs to encourage people to do this. I was in Kuwait recently, and the driving is insane. People are constantly cutting you off--just like in the video. In fact that video is pretty courteous by Kuwait standards! They never signal, they make left turns from the right lane--cutting across lanes of non-turning traffic, and they will go off road, into medians etc. to get ahead. The surprising thing was I saw absolutely no road rage. No one gets pissed off, it is nothing personal, we're just driving. I got PO'd at first, but after a day or two you get used to it and it is not a big deal. But I really had to consciously focus on my driving the first few days back in the states. So if someone does something stupid here, I contain my anger and back off. No sense having an accident, or a roadside fight with someone who might be crazy.

Apparently, no, it is not OK to be wrong.

The U.S. Social Security Administration (SSA) defines legal blindness as follows: Reduced central visual acuity of 20/200 or less in your better eye with use of the best eyeglass lens to correct your eyesight; or... Limitation of your field of view such that the widest diameter of the visual field in your better eye subtends an angle no greater than 20 degrees. (Source: http://www.allaboutvision.com/lowvision/legally-blind.htm) Prior to Lasik, my vision was close to 20/200 uncorrected. It was correctable to near 20/20 with glasses or contacts. However, in my uncorrected state of 20/200 I could easily recognize people that were within a self-defense range. And while my FOV was not limited, I think you can recognize someone in a 20 degree FOV. Like you said, it is complicated and so it is hard to distill it down to a series of check box criteria to determine whether the government will curtail your basic human rights.