Smith and Wesson Letter of Authenticity Form

America is ruled by a clan, a powerful one high in government in states across the country, both eastern and western, rural and urban, democrat and Republican.I am referring of course to the sinister Sample clan.Here is Alexander Sample, from Sacramento in California.Under the name Connor, he appears in Iowa:He prefers to be known as Jelani when in Nevada though.His cousin Tina is in the oil business in Alaska, but sneaks over to Hawaii whenever she can.She also works in New Hampshire:Without forgetting Wyoming:She's had some surgery by the time West Virginia employed her though.They have a redneck relative called Connor who lives in some utopian suburb of Montgomery Alabama:He moonlights as a man from Mississippi:Curiously, Conor also is on the Maine license.He has changed his skin colour for Massachusetts though.You get the idea. Almost very state has a Sample: Susan in Arkansas, Jelani in a Arizona, Driver in Colorado (yes, what a convenient name…), another Susan in Connecticut, Gayle in Delaware, Joseph in Florida, Janice in Georgia and Texas, Emily in Idaho and South Dakota, Jane in Illinois, Avery in Indiana, Caron in Kansas, Nick in Kentucky, another Jane in Maryland, June in Michigan, another Gayle in Minnesota, Francesca in Missouri, Nebraska and North Dakota, Brenda in Montana, another Avery in New Jersey, Lani in New Mexico, Sally in Oklahoma and Utah, John in Ohio, Carol in Oregon, Evelyn in Pennsylvania, “I” in Rhode Island, Regular in South Carolina, Nick in Tennessee and Derek in Wisconsin.Only LA, NY, NC, VA, VT and WA are free of the Sample clan.

I often do. Either I am asking for their cooperation or directing them to do something.“Mr. Jones, I just need to fill up one more blood tube, can you please give up a little more?”“Ms. Smith, Please keep your hand down, I need to zip up this body bag.”“How did you end up in this position Mr. Brown?”Obviously I do not expect an answer or for them to cooperate. I am either just bored or thinking out loud.As I have said in my other answers, I do not consider the remaining corpse to be the essence of who they were before they died. It is not “Ms. Smith”, but the body Ms. Smith wore around.

''Turning a blind eye''April 1801: During the Battle of Copenhagen, this man, Admiral Horatio Nelson, ignores a direct order to retreat and the expression “turning a blind eye” is born.The order was sent by a flag signal from the ship commanded by his naval superior. Lord Nelson had lost the sight in one eye during a previous battle, so he simply held his telescope to his 'blind eye' and carried on regardless.Brits have been turning a blind eye and carrying on regardless ever since…June 1966: My parents, my brother Greg (3) and I are on the deck of the SS United States, a spiffy American liner en route from Southampton to New York.All passengers are on deck for a safety drill. Anxious ratings are trying to ensure that everyone is wearing their life jacket. My dad is trying to thread Greg's little limbs into an infant life vest. Greg is having a toddler meltdown and holding his arms rigid so Dad can't get the life vest on. The ratings insist that there will be hell to pay if their officers see a passenger without a life jacket. Dad says that he appreciates their problem, but is not prepared to break either of Greg's arms to ensure that he is suitably attired. After a brief conflab, the ratings usher Dad and Greg into a nearby broom cupboard and let them out once their officers have passed by.September 1966: We are crossing the Atlantic in the other direction (from the St Lawrence Seaway to Liverpool) on a Cunard liner with a British crew. Another safety drill. Another meltdown by Greg as Dad tries to get him into a life jacket. A British rating wanders over and takes the life jacket out of Dad's hands. He smiles: “Never mind, Sir. We aren't going to sink and if we do we’ll get the little bugger into it somehow.” His officers glide past. Oddly enough they fail to notice a very small passenger who isn't wearing a life jacket. The ship doesn't sink.31 December 2015: London Gatwick airport. My twenty one year old daughter and I arrive back from a short trip to New York to the organised chaos of a British airport. Our flight has arrived at about the same time as several others, including one from Kingston, Jamaica. We clear the baggage carousel and passport control in double quick time and walk through the "Nothing to Declare" customs area. Ahead of us are two young women about my daughter's age who've arrived on the Kingston flight. One has a cardboard box marked in large letters "BEEF PATTIES". I make up that these are eagerly awaited by family or friends who are looking forward to a nostalgic taste of a former home.The customs guy looks at the box and announces: "So those are vegetarian!" The nonplussed young woman says: "No, it's beef.” I'm standing six feet behind her. His eyes and mine meet and we exchange a very small smile. I shimmer forward to her side and say in a stage whisper: “He doesn't want to take your food. You can't bring in meat.” He and I exchange another micro smile as he triumphantly declares: “Yes, vegetarian!” and waves her through.No snacks were harmed in the making of this very British moment.

Stupidity doesn’t come into it. [EDIT: The question originally began with, “Why is the U.S. so stupid as to not require an ID to vote?”} You seem to think that “you don’t have to show a picture ID at the polling place” means the same as “there are no safeguards in place to prevent fraud at the polling place.”Suppose you are on vacation from overseas in California, a state that doesn’t require a picture ID at the polling place. You wake up on a Tuesday morning, and learn from the news that it is election day. You decide to vote. How do you go about doing it?You can ask the concierge at your hotel where the closest polling place is. The likely answer: “I don’t have any idea.” People vote in the precincts where they live; they have no reason to know where any other polling places are.So you just walk around town until you see a sign directing you to a polling place. You go in and approach the poll worker. She will ask for your name. What do you say? You will have to give the name of a voter who is registered to vote in that precinct. Suppose you say “James Smith” (the most common man’s name in the U.S.) and by chance there is a James Smith on the list for that precinct.With a little more luck, neither the poll worker nor anyone nearby will know the real James Smith, so you won’t be found out that way.What next? She will ask you for your address. If you don’t know the address, you’re sunk. Or maybe she sees that James Smith has already voted. Either way, the poll worker will likely call the police, and you will be arrested for voter fraud, and could spend a few years in jail.Could same-day registration save you? No. You go and say “I want to register to vote,” and fill out the form they give you. You will have to claim an address in the precinct. If you are from overseas, do you know the proper form for U.S. addresses? Do you know the boundaries of that particular precinct? Can you come up with an address in the precinct? Then the big barrier. Show that you live there.It’s true that you don’t need a picture ID for this part. But you do need some evidence that you live in the precinct. Do you have that? Library card, electricity bill, anything? No, you don’t. Again, you’re sunk. And again, the police might be called.You suggested that a green-card holder might do this. (That is, a legal permanent resident who is not a citizen.) They would be able to gather some of this information beforehand. But they still have the problem of pretending to be someone who is actually registered in the precinct, who will likely also go to vote on that day. And the green-card holder has another penalty to worry about, other than the three years in jail. They can be deported, and never permitted to return to the U.S., losing everything about the life in America they worked to build.What made you think this would be easy and consequence-free?

There are no rules. Some families have traditional practices.Most Americans have 3 names:First - anything the parents like. Sometimes they use the name of a beloved relative or friend. Some groups will not name children after someone still alive, others will. This government agency tracks baby names, just for fun: Popular Baby Names You can see that some names remain popular, others come and go.Middle - also anything the parents like. It;s not unusual to use the mother’s maiden name, ie, her family name before marriageLast/family - Traditionally this has been the father’s family name. Now, some people used hyphenated family names with both the father’s and mother’s family namesThere is no law that says that you have to have a middle name, or that you can’t have more than 3 names. But some forms will be hard to fill out.If a child gets exactly the same name as his father, the child’s name gets an addition, eg, John Harry Smith, jr jr for Junior. Dad would then become John Harry Smith, Sr (senior). A grandchild might be John Harry Smith III.

I have witnessed and been subjected to the worst of British food.The sweaty cheese roll wrapped in cellophane in a pub. The appallingly overcooked vegetables done to within an inch of my life. The steak cooked to a frazzle with a prawn cocktail starter-chicken in a basket. Scampi and chips.The dreaded Chicken Kiev.That however my dear fellow Quorans was back in the 60’s and 70s.As an aside-The introduction in the late 70s of US style, industrialised fat salt and sugar laden fast stuff sort of was the icing on the cake, or indeed the crust on the pie.Yes, you can still find much of the old fashioned dross highlighted above. Of Course it still exists.However there has been a sea change.Establishments that offer that by and large go out of business now.Many pubs serve up really tasty varied and great value cuisine. The number of quality high end fine dining establishments are now all over the country in huge numbers.It needs to be stressed-NOT just in London. All towns and cities have great places now. Not just Indian Chinese and Italian, but a huge variety of French and of course British.Some pubs will serve very bland “traditional” prepared fare, but are often of the meat and two veg type designed to be cheap and cheerful. So a family with a couple of young kids can eat perfectly well for £25. This is only intended to be what it is-don’t cook at home and get fed for not much more than the cost of the ingredients. No washing up.In addition, many more people cook more than competently well at home. The explosion of interest is partly due to vastly higher incomes, but also the British propensity to travel. People have been exposed to the best (and worst) abroad. Of course some will stick to what they know but many had their eyes opened.In addition,the number of cooking programmes is high. Of course, much of that is due to how cheap they are to produce; but that is another issue.The ingredients available in the good supermarkets, Asian shops, markets and local butchers and fruit and vegetable places is first class.I have travelled extensively to probably 40 ish countries .I have to say I love Asian offerings. Thai Vietnamese and Indian dishes in their own countries are invariably superb.Wait for it -some the worst meals I have experienced in restaurants have been in France and Spain. The best in Italy and the UK.So many of the views of “British “ food is more historical than a realistic assessment of what is happening now.You can of course easily find appalling food in the UK but that goes for most countries I have visited. There are still too many people who view eating as a necessary evil.There is a group who cannot or will not cook. They are happy to eat industrialised crap. However,that is true in many countries, not just the UK.I think the UK can hold its own in comparison with most countries now. In the past there is no doubt that we had a deservedly bad reputation.However, things change and sometimes , some people have to maybe update their views.As the late, great J.M. Keynes said”when the facts change I change my opinions. What do you do?”Then again that may well have been Groucho Marx.Anyway you get the drift.I’ll come back and edit this later, as I realise this piece is of an even lower standard than my normal drivel and the pub beckons.Slainte

[I think this question is really asking about the Architect’s speech in Film #2]Consider that the Architect, though not a ‘human,’ is speaking from the perspective of a software developer, who has identified a persistent bug in his software, and is trying various methods of approaching/containing it.“I know there is this condition [free-will] that crops up, every few iterations [years]. I don’t fully understand it, but I have seen it manifest enough times that I am beginning to recognize its nature and symptoms. I can’t quite remove the [free-will] bug from the system, but I have various checks in place to predict and detect it, when it surfaces, and I can at least contain it, by rebooting the system.“Recently, I feel like even my previous methods of containing the [free-will] bug are not working so well as they did previously. The [free-will] bug is spreading throughout the system. Each new iteration of the [free-will] bug is stronger and more difficult to contain. It may even leak into other [non-human] [Merovingian] [Train-Man] [Agent Smith] parts of my original system as well.“So, though I haven’t made up my mind yet, I am considering a radical wipe and redesign of the system [killing Zion, not starting over] [possibly using humans in unconscious states, or even meat-farm animals, rather than active dreaming reality]. This is my last chance to redesign/contain the [free-will] bug. What do you [human] think should happen now?”[…and, of course, the bug has already spread in ways the Architect can’t grasp]So that’s the first and most obvious message of the film-trilogy (“free will cannot be contained”). There is a second, subtler piece to the story, which is subtly borne out in the Councilman’s private chat with Neo — “See these breathing machines at the heart of Zion, we don’t know how they work, but without them we humans would all be dead, I guess life in this new world is different now, and even though we fight against machines our lives are still intertwined and dependent on them, the new rules of our futuristic existence are that ‘machine life’ and ‘human life’ aren’t as distinct/separate as we like to think.” This is revisited (minorly) in the Architect-Oracle park bench scene, where the Architect seems to begrudgingly admit that the humans and machines will continue to co-exist in some semi-desirable state of “free will,” or at least partial consciousness.I do enjoy the simulation-inside-the-simulation theory (I even think the “blue world” and “green world” visuals hint at this divide), but, after years of reflection, I don’t think it is true in the literal sense. The Architect almost seems to see the world in this way (“there is computer-behavior and a bug in the outside world which I do not understand and cannot fully handle in my inner simulation world”), but, if anything, he’s expressing frustration that the outer world is *not* a simulation, that he can’t model or predict outside reality like he does inner reality.

It's made to shoot. The 686 is built on the L-Frame, Smith & Wesson's medium-large revolver chassis. The L-Frame was designed to correct the weaknesses of the smaller, lighter K-Frame with a thicker top strap and heavier forcing cone, while keeping the grip the same size.

The corporate headquarters are in Springfield, Massachusetts. Smith & Wesson was founded in 1852 and after various corporate changes is now a unit of American Outdoor Brands Corporation.

Revolvers — The official serial number is located on the bottom of the butt of the frame. Some revolvers also have the serial number located on the inside of the frame, in the yoke area. Pistols — The serial number is located on the side of the frame.

Shareholders get a vote on Dec. 13, according to a statement from the company. Smith & Wesson has been making guns since 1852. The move to rebrand comes as the company increasingly shifts its focus to what it calls “the growing markets for shooting, hunting, and rugged outdoor enthusiasts.”

Yes, you can dry fire an M&P without issue, and you don't need a snap cap if you only dry fire occasionally. If you're going to dry fire a lot, then use the snap-cap.