Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (641516)	1/8/2012 12:58:47 AM
From: d[-_-]b	4 Recommendations Respond to of 1578563

From your link - Teflon-coated bullets, sometimes erroneously referred to as "cop killer bullets", are bullets that have been covered with a coating of polytetrafluoroethylene. The round in question could, in fact, penetrate a police vest. However, as Kopsch pointed out in a 1990 interview, "adding a teflon coating to the round added 20% penetration power on metal and glass. Critics kept complaining about teflon's ability to penetrate body armor... In fact, teflon cut down on the round's ability to cut through the nylon or kevlar of body armor." [2] A common misconception, often perpetuated by films and television, is that coating normal bullets with Teflon will give them armor-piercing capabilities. In reality, Teflon and similar coatings were used primarily as a means to protect the gun barrel from the hardened bullet; the coating itself does not add any measurable armor-piercing abilities to otherwise normal ammunition. ---- That said the 5.7x28 developed for NATO was designed to defeat armor and it's about the size of a .22lr cartridge - no teflon or moly coating. The islamic nut case at Ft. Hood used a 5.7 - not a USA current issue gun or caliber. The armor piercing rounds are not for sale in the USA either.

To: bentway who wrote (641516)	1/8/2012 4:25:19 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578563

Bentway, > Eric's trying to distract you. Looks like you're the one who's distracted, given that the ball just sailed right over you. Tenchusatsu

To: bentway who wrote (641516)	1/8/2012 12:57:04 PM
From: Brumar89	2 Recommendations Respond to of 1578563

How gay is google? Gays get employee bennies normal employees don't Reverse Discrimination? Google's Gay-Only Employee Benefits On behalf of Navarette Law Firm posted in Discrimination 06 July 2010 Google has never been a company to rest on past accomplishments and accolades. Since 1998, the California-based Internet company has pushed the boundaries of online search, interactivity, online advertising and cloud computing. Google's latest move, a policy change, also pushes on established boundaries, but perhaps not in the right direction. At least that is the opinion of many who feel that the company's new "gay-only" employee benefits are an example of reverse discrimination in the workplace. Under the policy change, announced last Thursday on Google's blog, employees in same-sex domestic relationships would be eligible for compensation to offset taxes incurred by having a domestic partner on one's healthcare plan. These taxes apply to all Google employees with domestic partners on their healthcare plans. However, Google is only offering additional compensation to homosexual employees. The company's reasoning, thus far, has been that heterosexual domestic partners have the option of getting married. Married couples do not have to pay the tax in question. The problem with Google's new policy is that it offers one set of employees a benefit unavailable to other employees doing the same work. It offers this additional benefit to employees based solely on sexual orientation, which would seem a violation of the "equal pay for equal work" statute. While no one has criticized the company's desire to support same-sex domestic partnerships, many are concerned that employing reverse discrimination practices is not the right way to show this support. Google has yet to comment on these allegations. In addition to healthcare tax compensation, Google is also working to establish an equivalent to the Family Medical and Leave Act for domestic partners - again, only available to same-sex couples. http://www.sanfrancisco-employment-lawyer.com/2010/07/reverse-discrimination-googles-gay-only-employ...