spat
.950 JDJ
Just the way they want it.
NJ carry licensed security guard arrested for so called hollowpoint ammo..
- Thread starter WhyLeftiesGlorifyNY
- Start date
I like my work, and always have. IMHO, it would suck to have a job that you weren't happy doing overall. That said, given the state of our society today (and especially since Obama became President), I would probably hate to be a LEO these days. Obama really opened the floodgates of disrespect toward law enforcement. Being unappreciated would be one thing. But the amount of abuse heaped upon LEO's today, - it has to suck sometimes.
My lifelong interactions with the police (and there have been more than a few) have pretty much been overly positive, save for three that were all part of one incident. Whether they were traffic related; medical emergencies; suspicious activities; or 911 calls, I found most LEO's to be decent ordinary people just trying to do their job.
My only complaints had to do with the incident at my home in NY where: one officer tried to sneak up on me, and then insisted on disarming me when I was legally carrying, and then got right up in my face trying to intimidate me over my right to carry; the now removed OPPD Police Chief who wrote a false letter over that same incident trying to get my CCW permit revoked, and then further lied over it; and the Lt. Detective who jerked me around about returning my legal firearms back to me after that incident.
So, while 100% of LEO's may not be perfect (and what profession IS 100% perfect?), I have seen that the vast majority are decent people doing a tough job. And, as such, they will continue to have my respect.
My lifelong interactions with the police (and there have been more than a few) have pretty much been overly positive, save for three that were all part of one incident. Whether they were traffic related; medical emergencies; suspicious activities; or 911 calls, I found most LEO's to be decent ordinary people just trying to do their job.
My only complaints had to do with the incident at my home in NY where: one officer tried to sneak up on me, and then insisted on disarming me when I was legally carrying, and then got right up in my face trying to intimidate me over my right to carry; the now removed OPPD Police Chief who wrote a false letter over that same incident trying to get my CCW permit revoked, and then further lied over it; and the Lt. Detective who jerked me around about returning my legal firearms back to me after that incident.
So, while 100% of LEO's may not be perfect (and what profession IS 100% perfect?), I have seen that the vast majority are decent people doing a tough job. And, as such, they will continue to have my respect.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
My interactions with fire for the most part have been overly positive. I use it to cook. I use it for heating. I use it for burning off stray fibers on my clothes. For the most part, it has treated me well. There is absolutely no reason to be leery of it. No reason to be careful around it. No reason to watch it and make sure it stays under control.
Last edited:
Huh?
Analogies are great because they change the facts of a situation just enough to where it reinforces one's already formed opinion on the matter. It's a story that's similar in logic, but just enough different to make it sound like it proves the original point.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Analogies are great because they make you see things that you wouldn’t normally see. Fire is relatively safe. But you should still watch it. Unless of course the argument is that fire is 100 percent safe and it shouldn’t be watched to keep it from going out of control.
I have never been bitten by a poisonous snake either.
I’m not saying this to defend cops. I’m saying that you have an obsession with using analogies to reinforce your points/beliefs. There’s a reason why analogies are not allowed in court, or scientific experiments, serious college work, etc. They’re basically false positives. If a cop tried to give me an analogy to justify an action they took, I’d laugh in their face.
Facts matter, the actual facts being analyzed for whatever purpose. Not similar facts that sound close.
Facts matter, the actual facts being analyzed for whatever purpose. Not similar facts that sound close.
spat
.950 JDJ
Serious scientific and college and legal work is absolutely full of analogies.
They are called models or in the legal side precedent.
They are used to allow you to distill the underlying truth from a situation that is too complex to fully understand.
If someone presents an analogy as a critique of an argument you are presenting, you should demonstrate that it isn't a good fit for that situation. You can't just dismiss the argument because it isn't exactly the same.
Legal precedent is not randomly made up facts that “sound good”. Neither are previous experiments built upon to achieve further results.
What Will does is what you do when talking to children who cannot understand a concept. Amongst adults it’s either patronizing or outright insulting.
I’m not going to lend credence to a change of topic. Shifting facts is exactly that.
I should just ignore it, years of pointlessness have proven that to be the correct course of action, BUT, since we’ve lately been trying to figure out why EVERY thread devolves quickly into fighting, I’m offering one theory.
Another example would be the recent walmart thread. That one derailed wildly. Why? Well, read it.
What Will does is what you do when talking to children who cannot understand a concept. Amongst adults it’s either patronizing or outright insulting.
I’m not going to lend credence to a change of topic. Shifting facts is exactly that.
I should just ignore it, years of pointlessness have proven that to be the correct course of action, BUT, since we’ve lately been trying to figure out why EVERY thread devolves quickly into fighting, I’m offering one theory.
Another example would be the recent walmart thread. That one derailed wildly. Why? Well, read it.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
When threads derail it’s because one person continues to try to win an argument despite whatever facts are presented. So it can only go one of two ways.
1. Let one person make their point after quoting you despite being incorrect and just let it remain.
2. Keep responding to their point with facts. Eventually the truth comes out.
In the case of Walmart, one person was saying that it was illegal for them to require extra documents. That is clearly wrong. Any business can require whatever they want unless it isn’t less than what the law requires.
1. Let one person make their point after quoting you despite being incorrect and just let it remain.
2. Keep responding to their point with facts. Eventually the truth comes out.
In the case of Walmart, one person was saying that it was illegal for them to require extra documents. That is clearly wrong. Any business can require whatever they want unless it isn’t less than what the law requires.
Shadow2
6.5 Creedmoor
I have my ammo guy fill my HPs in with little red rubber erasers. See po weese man awe gawn.