All I'm saying is that viability has been demonstrated to be as early as 21 weeks. Drawing a line is obviously something that needs to be done, but it's a sticky wicket with continuously shifting standards.

So, conservatively 21 weeks?

The subjective tests can say whatever the officer wants them to say and given that they hold just as much weight as the PBT for hauling you in for further testing is my point. Passing the PBT doesn't win you anything.

By all means, if you can find something specific that states refusal of the PBT can result in a suspension of your license - as opposed to refusal of the desktop breathalyzer, urine, or blood let me know. But as it stands, the RSA makes a clear distinction between the PBT and the physical tests prescribed under implied consent.

The PBT can NEVER help you. If the officer wants to bring you down to the station for further physical testing they absolutely will. You can blow under 0.08 or even a 0.0 and still be brought in if you fail the officer's "subjective tests".

Implied consent and refusal are both covered under RSA 265-A4 and RSA 265-A14. Given that RSA 265-A15 says:

"Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to prevent or require a subsequent test pursuant to RSA 265-A:4. The police officer requesting the test shall advise orally the person to be tested that his or her failure to take the test or his or her taking of the test shall not be construed to prevent or require a subsequent test pursuant to RSA 265-A:4."

Unless something to the contrary explicitly indicates that refusal of the preliminary breather causes a license suspension I would have to believe that RSA 265-A15 protects against administrative punishments for refusal of the PBT.

I believe you can refuse the preliminary breath test (and field sobriety test in general) without penalty (other than winning a free ride down to the station or hospital for official testing).

See- https://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/xxi/265-a/265-A-15.htm

"Failure to submit to the test shall not constitute a violation of this chapter"

They probably won't. At best, they won't charge you. But they also won't chip the brush, do anything with the stumps, or regrade what they tear up up with their equipment. Mills don't like yard trees and pine isn't worthwhile for firewood. Processing firewood is also labor intensive so there's not a lot of profit to be had if they have to pay to take down the wood. Even finding people (particularly insured and bonded companies) who will drop the trees for the value of the wood is a difficult prospect depending on what area of the state you live in.

Any welding supply store.

Depends on market (worldwide vs. US) as well as whose certification numbers you trust. If you're talking worldwide numbers its definitely Thriller, if you're talking US numbers its arguably The Eagles 'Their Greatest Hits' as long as you trust the numbers put out by Warner and certified by the RIAA.

While I'm sure she's more than "1.5 years in prison" complicit in Harmony's murder, this plea hinges on her testifying against the husband. If that's the difference between him going away for life for murder (which was going to be nearly impossible to prove without her cooperation) and him catching a much shorter sentence for "welfare fraud" or some other consolation prize, I'll take it. Plus it's a suspended 10+ year sentence, so if she fucks up after release, it's back to prison she goes.

So I guess we could compromise and maintain the status quo, maybe end daylight savings time a little bit earlier. But as it stands, with a 6:45AM pickup time, your child is going to have to wait for the bus in the dark at least part of the year December through January irrespective of whether we stop changing the clocks. Ending daylight savings time might reduce the absolute number of days your child will be waiting in the dark, but it doesn't completely solve your issue. You might want to consider alternative solutions like petitioning for later school start times or looking to create a bus stop with protective bollards.

Which is exactly my point. Getting your day started at 4:30AM is much more reasonable than 3:30AM because you can go to bed at 9:30PM and still get a solid seven hours of sleep. I don't know about you, but I don't like getting ready for bed before Jeopardy is finished. Even if you're not going to take advantage from first light, the later sunrise also means you can take advantage of more of the cooler morning hours. If I can start making noise at 6:00AM and get a solid five+ hours in before the sun burns me out versus having to start at 5:00AM to get the same five hours I think everyone will be happier with that outcome. Unless you want to hear my chainsaw running at 5:00AM.

No. I don't want a 4:00AM sunrise in June, that's a waste of perfectly good daylight. Either eliminate standard time or maintain the status quo.

Yeah... I'm gonna need you to come in on Saturday to confirm what your costume was.

I liked ECMR. They installed directly on the underlayment (no purlins or furrings), but they will quote in removal of your old roof (I can't remember whether they quote for one or up to two courses of shingles). We also had "them" replace the gutters, since they were in rough shape as it is and there's a good chance your existing gutters are going to be in even rougher shape unless you have a really simple, shallow pitch roof. They contract gutters out at what seems to be cost - although I wasn't a huge fan of the gutter subcontractor. They didn't do a bad job, but did a few things that annoyed me like putting shorter downspout extensions than I would have installed and using too many short lengths of the leaf guards (I get that it saves materials, but it doesn't look as good).

Not including gutters, but including tear down and install of the new ice/water shield, underlayment, roof, and snow cleats it worked out to be around $17.5 per sq. ft. (give or take).

We went with aluminum over steel because aluminum is lighter and is more resistant to oxidation. In the event that your PVDF coating gets damaged/scratched...etc. aluminum will resist corrosion over steel. Also, we don't live directly on the coast, but we are close enough to where it's better safe than sorry in terms of sea air oxidation. Aluminum is more expensive than steel, but when you amortize the price difference over the expected life of the roof it really is negligible.

I would recommend ECMR for your final quote though and be prepared for a hard sell with a "limited time discount". They'll start knocking the price down with a sales promotion and then offer you an additional promotion if you sign now because it "allows them to better manage the costs of the sales quotes". Don't be afraid to lean into the high pressure quote by asking them to see if their manager can further sweeten the deal to help you avoid having to "sleep on it". I hate this style of sales, but if you're expecting it and already have additional quotes for comparison it's not as bad.

We used East Coast Metal roofing, but they only do aluminum interlocking metal shingles (no standing seam). We also looked at Advanced Metal Roofing (they do standing seam and shingles) and thought they had a good competitive quote, but they're primarily steel roofing and we decided to go with aluminum. We also got a quote from Classic Metal Roofs, but they came in WAY higher than ECMR. We also tried to get a quote from New England Metal Systems, but they didn't follow through.

The most optimistic scenario would probably be an accidental overdose from pills or other drugs that were left out. But since he had apparently given her at least one black eye on a previous occasion...