>> "Kathy" <kb...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>> news:7lh71aF3bobb1U1@mid.individual.net...
>>> Kris Baker wrote:
>>>> "Kathy" <kb...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:7lgldoF3elt96U1@mid.individual.net...

>>>>> There is a small inexpensive pointed device that will shatter a car
>>>>> window without much force.  I think you can get it at a store like
>>>>> Home
>>>>> Depot.

>>>>> Kathy

>>>> You didn't read my post with the mythbusters link.....where they
>>>> tried something like that?

>>> Oh, I didn't see it.  Sorry.  I saw the tool demonstrated on the news
>>> and
>>> just believed it.  When they did it, the window just shattered.

>>> Kathy

>> I don't know if it's the same tool, but they used some kind of
>> "punch" thing supposedly made for just that purpose, and it
>> didn't work well for them.   Underwater. <<

> Did you even read your own link?  According to the mythbusters, the punch
> and
> the window-breaking hammer both worked on the first try:

>>> You can open a window in a submerged car by attempting to break the
>>> window
> using a window-breaking hammer.
> CONFIRMED
> The device is designed with a pointed tip designed to shatter tempered
> glass.
> The hammer breaks the window on the first try.

> You can open a window in a submerged car by attempting to break the window
> using a spring-loaded center punch.
> CONFIRMED
> The point of the punch can work like the tip of the hammer, and punches
> are
> sold for the purpose of breaking window glass. The punch breaks the window
> on
> the first try. <<

> Amy (back to lurking)

> >How do you drive into a pond with the vehicle off?

> Like Susan Smith's kids did,
> but of course they were too young to unstrap their seatbelts
> let alone negotiate an exit.

> >> - Show quoted text -

> > Not if the car is still floating. If I don't already have the window
> > down 10 seconds after hitting the water... damn if I'm gonna patiently
> > sit there and wait for it to sink before I pop the window.

> I guess I don't understand why you wouldn't just open the damn
> window if it's not already submerged.

> If I'm a passenger and the driver is unconscious and the windows/doors
> have all been master locked by the driver... what are my options
> sitting in a dark vehicle that is totally unfamiliar to me... as we
> slowly sink into oblivion?

>> Amy (back to lurking)

> Now there's a name I haven't seen in awhile.
> Howya been, starting to get cool back there?  <<

>> In
>> Message-ID:<0001HW.C7199D3803579B8FB01AD...@news.eternal-september.org>
>> posted on Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:30:32 -0400, Amy Guskin wrote: Begin

>>> Amy (back to lurking)

>> Now there's a name I haven't seen in awhile.
>> Howya been, starting to get cool back there?  <<

> Thanks for asking.  Sick as a dog with H1N1, actually.  I still read here
> daily, and enjoy many of the posters (you included).  Others, not so much.
> Still not remotely tempted to start posting in earnest again. :-)

> Amy

>>> In
>>> Message-ID:<0001HW.C7199D3803579B8FB01AD...@news.eternal-september.org>
>>> posted on Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:30:32 -0400, Amy Guskin wrote: Begin

>>>> Amy (back to lurking)

>>> Now there's a name I haven't seen in awhile.
>>> Howya been, starting to get cool back there?  <<

>> Thanks for asking.  Sick as a dog with H1N1, actually.  I still read here
>> daily, and enjoy many of the posters (you included).  Others, not so
>> much.
>> Still not remotely tempted to start posting in earnest again. :-)

>> Amy

> Amy, I've just sent my strong healing powers your way!

> We'd like to see you post, but heck....if we provide entertainment,
> we're not doing a bad job.

> Kris

>>> In
>>> Message-ID:<0001HW.C7199D3803579B8FB01AD...@news.eternal-september.org>
>>> posted on Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:30:32 -0400, Amy Guskin wrote: Begin

>>>> Amy (back to lurking)

>>> Now there's a name I haven't seen in awhile.
>>> Howya been, starting to get cool back there?  <<

>> Thanks for asking.  Sick as a dog with H1N1, actually.  I still read here
>> daily, and enjoy many of the posters (you included).  Others, not so much.
>> Still not remotely tempted to start posting in earnest again. :-)

>> Amy

> Amy, I've just sent my strong healing powers your way! <<

> Amy! Don't lurk. Post! <<

>>> "Kathy" <kb...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>> news:7lh71aF3bobb1U1@mid.individual.net...
>>>> Kris Baker wrote:
>>>>> "Kathy" <kb...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:7lgldoF3elt96U1@mid.individual.net...

>>>>>> There is a small inexpensive pointed device that will shatter a car
>>>>>> window without much force.  I think you can get it at a store like
>>>>>> Home
>>>>>> Depot.

>>>>>> Kathy

>>>>> You didn't read my post with the mythbusters link.....where they
>>>>> tried something like that?

>>>> Oh, I didn't see it.  Sorry.  I saw the tool demonstrated on the news
>>>> and
>>>> just believed it.  When they did it, the window just shattered.

>>>> Kathy

>>> I don't know if it's the same tool, but they used some kind of
>>> "punch" thing supposedly made for just that purpose, and it
>>> didn't work well for them.   Underwater. <<

>> Did you even read your own link?  According to the mythbusters, the punch
>> and
>> the window-breaking hammer both worked on the first try:

>>>> You can open a window in a submerged car by attempting to break the
>>>> window
>> using a window-breaking hammer.
>> CONFIRMED
>> The device is designed with a pointed tip designed to shatter tempered
>> glass.
>> The hammer breaks the window on the first try.

>> You can open a window in a submerged car by attempting to break the
>> window
>> using a spring-loaded center punch.
>> CONFIRMED
>> The point of the punch can work like the tip of the hammer, and punches
>> are
>> sold for the purpose of breaking window glass. The punch breaks the
>> window on
>> the first try. <<

>> Amy (back to lurking)

> You're right, I said that *completely* wrong.

> But.....the water pressure problem  may still exist.    If you can break
> the
> window before the water appears in the window, you can probably
> get out.   Otherwise, the water's going to flood in as soon as you
> break it....and you have to wait (at which point, you could have
> opened the door or window, as they describe).

> Kris

>> Amy! Don't lurk. Post! <<

> Thanks, JonesieCat -- I might, I might!  What brought me out of lurkdom
> was
> the fact that this is sort of my pet subject.  I'm one of those people who
> is
> afraid of driving over bridges.  It's not about the height; it's about the
> possibility of the car ending up in the water.  And I knew Kris didn't
> mean
> what she posted!

> Amy

> >> - Show quoted text -

> > Not if the car is still floating. If I don't already have the window
> > down 10 seconds after hitting the water... damn if I'm gonna patiently
> > sit there and wait for it to sink before I pop the window.

> I guess I don't understand why you wouldn't just open the damn
> window if it's not already submerged.

> > Amy! Don't lurk. Post! <<

> Thanks, JonesieCat -- I might, I might!  What brought me out of lurkdom was
> the fact that this is sort of my pet subject.  I'm one of those people who is
> afraid of driving over bridges.  It's not about the height; it's about the
> possibility of the car ending up in the water.  And I knew Kris didn't mean
> what she posted!

> Amy

>>> Amy! Don't lurk. Post! <<

>> Thanks, JonesieCat -- I might, I might!  What brought me out of lurkdom was
>> the fact that this is sort of my pet subject.  I'm one of those people who
>> is
>> afraid of driving over bridges.  It's not about the height; it's about the
>> possibility of the car ending up in the water.  And I knew Kris didn't mean
>> what she posted!

>> Amy

> I had a friend who wasn't afraid of regular bridges, just drawbridges.
> I had no
> idea of her fear until we were up in Portland and about to cross over
> to Washington.
> She was driving, went into a big panic when she saw the drawbridge
> sign,  turned
> around and said she couldn't do it.  I can't even remember how we got
> over.
> Probably took another non-drawbridge since there are other bridges to
> cross there. <<

>> Amy Guskin wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 23:09:25 -0400, JonesieCat wrote
>>> (in article <Fx5Jm.52786$ze1.15...@news-server.bigpond.net.au>):

>>>> Amy! Don't lurk. Post! <<

>>> Thanks, JonesieCat -- I might, I might!  What brought me out of lurkdom
>>> was
>>> the fact that this is sort of my pet subject.  I'm one of those people
>>> who
>>> is
>>> afraid of driving over bridges.  It's not about the height; it's about
>>> the
>>> possibility of the car ending up in the water.  And I knew Kris didn't
>>> mean
>>> what she posted!

>>> Amy

>> I had a friend who wasn't afraid of regular bridges, just drawbridges.
>> I had no
>> idea of her fear until we were up in Portland and about to cross over
>> to Washington.
>> She was driving, went into a big panic when she saw the drawbridge
>> sign,  turned
>> around and said she couldn't do it.  I can't even remember how we got
>> over.
>> Probably took another non-drawbridge since there are other bridges to
>> cross there. <<

> Oof!  Your poor friend.  For me, it comes and goes, and some bridges are
> worse than others.  I go over the Verrazano a lot, so I'm sort of inured
> to
> it -- except in a high wind -- but I almost froze and had to pull over on
> the
> Francis Scott Key Bridge in Maryland a few weeks ago.  I was ill just
> looking
> at it as we approached!  I told my husband, never again -- we'll have to
> find
> another route next time!  The only way I managed to keep driving was
> because
> he started quizzing me on members of 80s girl bands to keep my mind
> focused
> elsewhere, until we got all the way over.  It worked.  Thank you, Bangles,
> Go
> Gos, and Bananarama!

> Amy

> > 3 ND college students found dead in sunken Jeep
> > By BLAKE NICHOLSON
> > ThreeNorthDakotacollege softball players believed to have been on a
> > stargazing trip were found dead inside a Jeep after signals from their
> > last desperate phone calls helped lead authorities to a rural farm pond.

> At least one of them should have been roadgazing.

> > 3 ND college students found dead in sunken Jeep
> > By BLAKE NICHOLSON
> > ThreeNorthDakotacollege softball players believed to have been on a
> > stargazing trip were found dead inside a Jeep after signals from their
> > last desperate phone calls helped lead authorities to a rural farm pond.

> At least one of them should have been roadgazing.

>> They were driving on a path that led them directly into the stock
>> pond. This was at night and there was tall grass all around. The
>> article said stargazing... but I suspect that they were actually doing
>> some geocaching. Which means, if I'm correct, that their deaths were
>> the result of a deadly prank

> How did you arrive at this conclusion?
> ----

> What is geocaching?

> jc

>>> They were driving on a path that led them directly into the stock
>>> pond. This was at night and there was tall grass all around. The
>>> article said stargazing... but I suspect that they were actually doing
>>> some geocaching. Which means, if I'm correct, that their deaths were
>>> the result of a deadly prank

>> How did you arrive at this conclusion?
>> ----

>> What is geocaching?

>> jc

> You hide something at a location you make note of in your GPS, like a
> container with little toys and a log book - or sometimes a little film
> container and a tiny log book (and there are other variations). Post the
> GPS coordinates on a site like geocaching.com, then others go there, find
> it, sign the log, maybe take and/or leave a little toy. In the end often
> you post on the geocaching site that you found it with comments, like the
> condition it was in, etc. Google Maps will show caches, as will a few
> other places besides geocaching.com, but usually for the best caches you
> need a login and at least in geocaching.com, it's like $30 a year (IOW,
> members are traceable). I don't think that's the deal here, though. Once
> you get really close to a cache you don't drive, you start walking N/S/E/W
> to the exact location, which end up being a food this way, 2 feet that
> way, buried under some sticks. Plus, who would take the risk posting a
> deadly location. I guess it's possible, but I don't think that's what
> happened.

>>> What is geocaching?

>>> jc
>> You hide something at a location you make note of in your GPS, like a
>> container with little toys and a log book - or sometimes a little film
>> container and a tiny log book (and there are other variations). Post the
>> GPS coordinates on a site like geocaching.com, then others go there, find
>> it, sign the log, maybe take and/or leave a little toy. In the end often
>> you post on the geocaching site that you found it with comments, like the
>> condition it was in, etc. Google Maps will show caches, as will a few
>> other places besides geocaching.com, but usually for the best caches you
>> need a login and at least in geocaching.com, it's like $30 a year (IOW,
>> members are traceable). I don't think that's the deal here, though. Once
>> you get really close to a cache you don't drive, you start walking N/S/E/W
>> to the exact location, which end up being a food this way, 2 feet that
>> way, buried under some sticks. Plus, who would take the risk posting a
>> deadly location. I guess it's possible, but I don't think that's what
>> happened.

> That sounds fun. What a horrible thing if someone had done this on purpose,
> as a prank. Though they did, possibly they wouldn't think people would go
> out looking in the dark?

> Yep, the mysterious part is why the girls were out in the middle of no where
> like that.

> jc

> news:7mtqr3F3ik46eU1@mid.individual.net...

> > JonesieCat wrote:
> >> "Peter Tuck" <petertuc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:b3dedd4f-63d8-4d44-adb7-fc88c98be2a8@z4g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> >> On Nov 22, 3:27 am, Hedera Helix <assh...@quantico.mailtmp.com> wrote:
> >>> On Nov 4, 2:47 pm, Slow Motion Apocalypse

> >>> They were driving on a path that led them directly into the stock
> >>> pond. This was at night and there was tall grass all around. The
> >>> article said stargazing... but I suspect that they were actually doing
> >>> some geocaching. Which means, if I'm correct, that their deaths were
> >>> the result of a deadly prank

> >> How did you arrive at this conclusion?
> >> ----

> >> What is geocaching?

> >> jc

> > You hide something at a location you make note of in your GPS, like a
> > container with little toys and a log book - or sometimes a little film
> > container and a tiny log book (and there are other variations). Post the
> > GPS coordinates on a site like geocaching.com, then others go there, find
> > it, sign the log, maybe take and/or leave a little toy. In the end often
> > you post on the geocaching site that you found it with comments, like the
> > condition it was in, etc. Google Maps will show caches, as will a few
> > other places besides geocaching.com, but usually for the best caches you
> > need a login and at least in geocaching.com, it's like $30 a year (IOW,
> > members are traceable). I don't think that's the deal here, though. Once
> > you get really close to a cache you don't drive, you start walking N/S/E/W
> > to the exact location, which end up being a food this way, 2 feet that
> > way, buried under some sticks. Plus, who would take the risk posting a
> > deadly location. I guess it's possible, but I don't think that's what
> > happened.

> That sounds fun. What a horrible thing if someone had done this on purpose,
> as a prank. Though they did, possibly they wouldn't think people would go
> out looking in the dark?

> Yep, the mysterious part is why the girls were out in the middle of no where
> like that.

> jc

> news:7mtqr3F3ik46eU1@mid.individual.net...

> > JonesieCat wrote:
> >> "Peter Tuck" <petertuc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:b3dedd4f-63d8-4d44-adb7-fc88c98be2a8@z4g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> >> On Nov 22, 3:27 am, Hedera Helix <assh...@quantico.mailtmp.com> wrote:
> >>> On Nov 4, 2:47 pm, Slow Motion Apocalypse

> >>> They were driving on a path that led them directly into the stock
> >>> pond. This was at night and there was tall grass all around. The
> >>> article said stargazing... but I suspect that they were actually doing
> >>> some geocaching. Which means, if I'm correct, that their deaths were
> >>> the result of a deadly prank

> >> How did you arrive at this conclusion?
> >> ----

> >> What is geocaching?

> >> jc

> > You hide something at a location you make note of in your GPS, like a
> > container with little toys and a log book - or sometimes a little film
> > container and a tiny log book (and there are other variations). Post the
> > GPS coordinates on a site like geocaching.com, then others go there,
> > find
> > it, sign the log, maybe take and/or leave a little toy. In the end often
> > you post on the geocaching site that you found it with comments, like
> > the
> > condition it was in, etc. Google Maps will show caches, as will a few
> > other places besides geocaching.com, but usually for the best caches you
> > need a login and at least in geocaching.com, it's like $30 a year (IOW,
> > members are traceable). I don't think that's the deal here, though. Once
> > you get really close to a cache you don't drive, you start walking
> > N/S/E/W
> > to the exact location, which end up being a food this way, 2 feet that
> > way, buried under some sticks. Plus, who would take the risk posting a
> > deadly location. I guess it's possible, but I don't think that's what
> > happened.

> That sounds fun. What a horrible thing if someone had done this on
> purpose,
> as a prank. Though they did, possibly they wouldn't think people would go
> out looking in the dark?

> Yep, the mysterious part is why the girls were out in the middle of no
> where
> like that.

> jc

>> news:7mtqr3F3ik46eU1@mid.individual.net...

>>> JonesieCat wrote:
>>>> "Peter Tuck" <petertuc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:b3dedd4f-63d8-4d44-adb7-fc88c98be2a8@z4g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>>>> On Nov 22, 3:27 am, Hedera Helix <assh...@quantico.mailtmp.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 4, 2:47 pm, Slow Motion Apocalypse
>>>>> They were driving on a path that led them directly into the stock
>>>>> pond. This was at night and there was tall grass all around. The
>>>>> article said stargazing... but I suspect that they were actually doing
>>>>> some geocaching. Which means, if I'm correct, that their deaths were
>>>>> the result of a deadly prank
>>>> How did you arrive at this conclusion?
>>>> ----
>>>> What is geocaching?
>>>> jc
>>> You hide something at a location you make note of in your GPS, like a
>>> container with little toys and a log book - or sometimes a little film
>>> container and a tiny log book (and there are other variations). Post the
>>> GPS coordinates on a site like geocaching.com, then others go there,
>>> find
>>> it, sign the log, maybe take and/or leave a little toy. In the end often
>>> you post on the geocaching site that you found it with comments, like
>>> the
>>> condition it was in, etc. Google Maps will show caches, as will a few
>>> other places besides geocaching.com, but usually for the best caches you
>>> need a login and at least in geocaching.com, it's like $30 a year (IOW,
>>> members are traceable). I don't think that's the deal here, though. Once
>>> you get really close to a cache you don't drive, you start walking
>>> N/S/E/W
>>> to the exact location, which end up being a food this way, 2 feet that
>>> way, buried under some sticks. Plus, who would take the risk posting a
>>> deadly location. I guess it's possible, but I don't think that's what
>>> happened.
>> That sounds fun. What a horrible thing if someone had done this on
>> purpose,
>> as a prank. Though they did, possibly they wouldn't think people would go
>> out looking in the dark?

>> Yep, the mysterious part is why the girls were out in the middle of no
>> where
>> like that.

>> jc

> I'll bet THIS individual is into geocaching...  http://www.stargazing.com/

> I went and took a gander... and it's not quite in the middle of
> nowhere. The path they took veered NE off the main driveway that heads
> north into the farmyard about a 1/4 mile or so up the road. A
> satellite photo shows that the path they drove goes right to the edge
> of the stock pond. So at night, with tall grass all around it, there
> would be no way of knowing how dangerously close you were actually
> getting to that body of water. I don't own any GPS devices, but
> according to a friend, GPS will show even small bodies of water...
> even a stock pond.
> ----------

> So if they were using GPS, they ought to have know they were heading to
> water? Does it make a difference which sort of setting they had it on? I
> mean, would the type of graphics make a difference in terms of identifying
> what they were looking at?

> jc