mav

Damn TMF, what kind of coffee did you have this morning?  I don't always agree with some of the stuff you post, but I think you have been pretty much spot on in this thread.

  Yeah, but I busted his ass a while back on milk toast versus milquetoast.  One of my more enjoyable moments.  :lol:

My Avatar came from James Bond's Live and Let Die.  I watched it again a week or so ago, and I forgot how funny Sheriff J.W. Pepper's skit was.  It was about time to update Bluto (John Belushi) anyway.

  I agree with this 100%, and I am glad there are people available to do so.  If you want, you guys are more than welcome to edit my posts for grammatical errors.  It will help keep OhShoot off my ass.  :)

  Sorry about that Robert.  Your misinterpretation of what I wrote is my fault.  What Mike and TMF are doing above is not what David was referring to.  He was talking about my actual post, not a quote from my post, being edited in the above manner that I described.  The only people who can edit your original post are moderators and yourself.

  Gordon, I have absolutely no problems with you bringing a post inline with your interpretation of what the admin's want.  I might not always agree and may openly state my disagreement, but it is their forum and your job to moderate it.  In the case I was referring to, I did not have a problem with my post being edited, only in the manner in which it was done.  When my post was edited to look as follows   *************************************************************************************************************************************************************** Hypertext link   READ IT!! ****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** I was rather irritated.  In my mind, that was an unnecessary provocation, which ultimately did not produce the intended results.  I am certainly not trying to tell you how to moderate the forum, but I ask if there could have better approach.  As Mike was alluding to in an earlier post, I think so, and I believe the end results would have been what you and the admins wanted.   As far as this issue goes, I am done with it, and your apology was unnecessary, but I do appreciate the gesture.

  Thank you.  You just proved my point and my concern.  There was no rule regarding pejorative spellings.  It was a suggestion from TGODavid, which you interpreted as a rule and took a heavy-handed approach in enforcement, at least in my case.  I was also informed by the administrator that no one should be editing other people's posts.  To state that I have no respect for the community and the rules you use to rule is a bunch of crap.  I have tried to be good standing member of this community, which I am certain that others will attest to.

What worries me is moderator discretion without any concrete rules established.  For example,  I had one of my posts edited and was publicly dressed-down for the use of two incredibly mild pejoratives (McLame and Grahamnetsy) several months back.  I got really ticked-off considering the rest of the forum was loaded with pejoratives, and some were very tasteless, but nothing was done.  Will the same thing happen under the new proposals?  I would think so.  I could easily see how certain moderators might misconstrue a poster's intent in a post and edit or delete their post, or even worse, boot the poster.  I respect and understand how you have to stand behind your moderators, but this can be very tricky, especially if it is applied with impartial treatment across the board, which I don't believe it can be considering we do have cliques/favorites within the community.  Also, moderators are just like everyone else; they can make mistakes too.   In regards to the anti-LEO stuff, it doesn't really bother me.  This community is very diverse.  We have some that are anti-LEO, some bleed blue, others are anti-government, and we have some who believe more government is the answer to all of our problems.  Regarding other issues such as religion, we have some that are devout Christians, and we have some that defecate themselves even mentioning Christianity.  We also have moonbats, dumbasses, smartasses, and plain ol' jackasses as well.  Any regular contributor knows who these people are, and most of us know that you will never convince these people that their line of thinking could be wrong.   Do I find content insulting or offensive at times?  Of course I do.  However, I realize that the person who is being antagonistic is just some guy/girl sitting behind their keyboard whom I will probably never meet, more than likely they are full of it, and they have absolutely no influence over my life.  Some might say this creates discord, but I would say that they need to get thicker skin because not everyone is going to agree with you, and some may do it in a tasteless manner.   Ultimately, you are going to do what you want.  This is your forum of which, I am a guest, and my opinion holds very little value.  Even though I disagree with your intent, I will do my best to play by the rules, even though they aren't very clear to me.  Assuming these rules go in effect, I would like to suggest that any reprimand, unless it is an egregious violation of the TOS, be made through a PM.  In my mind, it is much more professional, and it can go a long way towards diffusing any ill will that a poster has towards the TGO staff.

Since TripleDigitRide just posted a Metallica thread, that is what I am now listening to.

Since we are discussing Metallica...   Favorite Metallica song and album?   I would have to say mine is Creeping Death or To Live is to Die (first Metallica song I learned to play) and Master of Puppets for the album. 

Considering Metallica, at least pre-Load Metallica, is my all time favorite band, yes, I will go see this.

  While I can't speak for JayC, I believe you are misinterpreting what he is saying.  I don't think he is anti-LEO or anti-government.  I do, however,  think he is for limited amount of both entities, which I agree with.  What we have now just isn't working, and it will never work because the model has been proven to be a failure.  The question now becomes, do we want to continue down the same path where government incessantly grows, puts each and everyone of us further in debt with no means to repay, and have our liberties slowly stripped from us, etc...?  The obvious answer should be a resounding, hell no.  If we are to change, why not change to a model that did work for this country?

We could compromise and just get rid of most of the SWAT units.  Seriously, I have no idea why a lot of communities have a SWAT unit.

I guess this is mainly catering to the men who can't afford plastic surgery and/or won't get off the couch.  The add also said women could wear it.  Don't know if I really want to touch that one.

  While IDPA or whatever may improve their firearm skills, it won't do anything about the common sense you mentioned.  I would prefer more focus on that than firearm skills.

I could be way off base here (not really), but it seems to me that if you are going to enforce the laws then perhaps you should know what the law is in the first place.  To make an arrest after you have been shown to be wrong isn't protecting and serving; it is just being a d***.

  Not true.  We are already there.  I am certain that if you looked through all the laws we have on the books, everyone one of us would be guilty of something.

I would side with the officers on this one.  However, I seriously question their tactics.  One officer pulls a gun, and another pulls a taser?  I wasn't there, but if the guy was eventually subdued with a taser, it seems to me like that would have been the first option, not deadly force.   As far as shooting bystanders, the department should suffer the same fate as individuals do; you get your ass sued off.

  We must be watching two different videos.  He moved him back then was attacked?  I watched that clip several times, and what I saw was the officer pushed one the guys and got his hands slapped away.  It was then when the officer attacked, not the other way around.  Neither victim had their hands up after the officer got his hands slapped away.  I agree with Mark, that short cop is too hot-headed.    I certainly didn't see any protect and serve in this video.  Protecting us from what?  As far as serving, it looks to me more like harassing.

  Dave, I have no idea what happened, but the story I read doesn't make any sense.  Obviously though, the department now thinks the officer was wrong.   (edit) -  Originally, the department thought the officer was justified in his actions.  After an investigation, the department concluded the officer was in the wrong.  Is it normal procedure to place other officers on the scene on paid administrative leave?  They didn't shoot the victim, so why are they being punished?  There was an investigation, so what aren't we being told regarding the other two officers?  One of whom apparently used a taser.   The way the article reads, it appears to be a cover-up to minimize lawsuits.

It is more than sad.  This story stinks to high heaven.  The victim after having a car crash banged on the door of a house nearby.  A woman answered the door, and then called the police because she thought the victim was a burglar.  Hmmm, never knew burglars knocked on doors, but okay.  After the police arrive the victim charges after three police officers?  BS.  Like I said, this story stinks.

Well, I am glad it was Fox, and not some nut job like Jones, reporting the story.  Still, I am sure that many will dismiss this as no big deal.  Move along, nothing to see here.   Lester, I agree, orange jump suits would look lovely on these jackasses.  Unfortunately, there are not enough good people in power to dress them accordingly.

If Obama is Muslim, I would say he is about as much Muslim as most people are Christian, which is not very much.  It has always been my belief that Obama is too much of an elitist and egotist to believe in or worship anything but himself.  Obama's god is Obama.

  I wouldn't use that as a reason not to trust the news source because I believe that can be said of everyone in the news business and talk radio.  I don't care for Jones because most of what he discusses doesn't interest me, as I, like you, am not one who thinks everything is a conspiracy.  However, the majority of the stuff that he says or puts on his site isn't meant for people like you or me; it is fodder for his core audience.  I agree with Mark, every now and then he gets a hit on something that is plausible and has mainstream appeal.    Just to note, the only time I ever visit his site is when there is a link from Drudge.

I am down for 1 lower and 1 upper.  If the price is really good, I may take two of each.