Re: Legalities of sidewalk astronomy
- From: Tom Randy <Sorry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 10:38:00 GMT
On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 09:05:10 -0700, Mean Mr Mustard wrote:
> The city bureaucrats are of course correct in their request for a policy
> and inspection. As a tax payer I certainly don't want any incident that
> can raise my taxes.
Me either however you are exaggerating the situation.
> I've always wondered why there is a segment of the amateur community that
> feels the need to "educate" the public. They risk theft, damage and even
> lawsuits if anything goes wrong ... "Your Plossl gave me pinkeye, I'm
> suing!!"
You are exaggerating again.
Christ(tm), nice attitude. Amateurs do a much better job of "teaching"
astronomy than teachers do. It's not only about teaching but to show
people things they may never have seen otherwize. Years ago I showed
several people a solar eclipse through my scope. They thought it was the
coolest thing. It's great hearing the "ooohs and Ahhhs".
> Course it's nice to introduce young eyes to the hobby, but the children
> who are interested already own their first scope. The rest of the public
> are flat-earthers.
I strongly disagree but that's o.k.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Legalities of sidewalk astronomy
- From: Marty
- Re: Legalities of sidewalk astronomy
- References:
- Re: Legalities of sidewalk astronomy
- From: Mean Mr Mustard
- Re: Legalities of sidewalk astronomy
- Prev by Date: EQ-2 and C5-like telescopes
- Next by Date: Re: galileo question
- Previous by thread: Re: Legalities of sidewalk astronomy
- Next by thread: Re: Legalities of sidewalk astronomy
- Index(es):