INIT915

Yes, 100% fact.

They are not the only ones, but they are the bulk of the problem.

Or it was just another abuse of RLS from yet another commercial outfit.

If you agree that if couldn't handle the extra traffic, then why was it too bad that Tarrytown held it up in Court? Seems counterintuitive. Might end up being a blessing that Tarrytown held it up in Court.

From MLSS's FaceBook. While I have no inside information, I wonder if the proliferation of flight programs, mostly full-time airships in northern New Jersey, just over the state line, played a role in this decision.

Yes, see #5 on my list.

SP Aviation is relatively unaffected. Their primary mission remains law enforcement. As for a new partnership, I'm not even sure one is needed. With the number of air assets available to the region, coverage seems more than adequate. Couple that with the new trauma center planned in Orange County, I think MLSS made a smart, business oriented decision. Think about the number of resources available to this region: LifeNet Air 2 LifeNet 7-5 Atlantic Air 1 Hackensack Air 1 NorthStar Lehigh MedEvac Air 2 PennSTAR Air 3 LifeStar 1 & 2 Geisinger LifeFlight 3 If you extend the response area even further, you can add in even more: Lehigh MedEvac Air(s) 2, 4 & 7 PennSTAR 5 JeffSTAT Air 2 LifeNet 7-1 & 7-2

I think that's an unfortunate generalization. I believe there are still a healthy number of people who either volunteer or work hard for career positions (FD and PD) for the right reasons. Would it be great if every applicant did so? Sure, but let's be realistic.

Looks like some movement on this... http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/house-gop-opens-path-for-sandy-bill-86195.html?hp=f3

http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com/2013/01/14/westchester-youth-bureau-gets-new-leadership-astorino-makes-other-appointments/

And therein lies the debate. Everyone wants (what they perceive as) the personalized service of a local PD, all while paying the costs of a consolidated force.

http://m.nydailynews.com/new-york/51-billion-sandy-relief-bill-jeopardy-passing-house-article-1.1235337

And AFS, just to clarify, the tort definition of assault absolutely does not require a physical act. You are confusing it with the tort definition of battery. They are not interchangeable common law definitions, although people like to do so.

Your entitled to your interpretation of history.

Given that, by your own admission, "... as for the 3/5's compromise, I am a little more OK with that one because I understand what it protected against...", it shouldn't come as a surprise to many of us that your not a supporter of the SPLC.

Or Latin :-)

No, that wouldn't have been unlawful, as quod est necessarium est licitum, for what is necessary is lawful under the law. Landing that plane in that spot, at that moment, was most necessary, and by extension, most lawful. He would be free of UTT's!

These Church's are free to spew their hate, whether it be celebrating at soldiers' funerals or protesting the funeral of murdered first-graders or whatever they come up with next. Just as those who oppose them are free to criticize them. The First Amendment works both ways. I've never seen these petitions, but I doubt anyone in their right mind thinks that they are going anywhere. Feel free not to sign them, that's your right. Or, if you agree with them, feel free to sign them, that's your right as well.

Well, luckily we have some pretty knowledgable fire folks on this forum who have a lot of insight, and I hope they don't feel dissuaded from joining the conversation solely because they might not live there. I for one, encourage their contributions (past and future) and hope they continue!

Well, that totals three. So I trust we'll never see you comment on any topic if it's not directly related to where you work and live?

If you have to live in Yonkers or work for Empress, most of the Members on this board are ineligible to participate in this discussion.

Wow, two whole Republicans? If that's true, I think that's means basically "the entire Republican party" is accurate.

I see the entry for Alaska fisheries, but what is your source that Schumer/Gillibrand demanded it?

If is wasn't for rampant (and patently incorrect) speculation, we wouldn't have half the posts we have as it is! :-)