Idiot Cops

[darin]

(sigh)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2294225/SWAT-officer-attracts-ridicule-s-pictured-rifle-sight-backwards.html

First - what kinda nut job shows up with a backwards-mounted optic?
Second - what kinda nut-job leaves his finger on the trigger of a shotgun, while pointing the shotty into a HMMWV interior?
Third - What's with the paramilitary uniforms? I HATE seeing cops all 'tactical' while in an urban environment. F'ing wanna-be Soldiers, if you ask me.

THESE are the groups our government allows to "protect" us (although they have NO DUTY to protect us).

[gabosaurus]

First, WTF is a "dillhole?"

And what makes you believe that soldiers are superior to police? Are you a wannabe cop?
Darin, I want to like you. But then you make some stupid thread that portrays you as an arrogant dickhead.

[taft2012]

F'ing wanna-be Soldiers, if you ask me.


I didn't ask you.

Lemme check....mmmmm, no. Nobody asked you.

[darin]

Do you ever talk to the subject?


Subject is: cops are given assault weapons, are free to break laws, bend laws, as if they are somehow better than citizens they "serve". It's silly and dangerous in terms of "liberty".


Our military IS superior to police, in terms of professionalism, training, and all that. Cops dressed like Soldiers will make sheeple more-easily allow a national police force; not to mention violates the purpose of combat uniforms.


gabby, I suspect you have a little Crush on me....

[taft2012]

Our military IS superior to police, in terms of professionalism, training, and all that. Cops dressed like Soldiers will make sheeple more-easily allow a national police force; not to mention violates the purpose of combat uniforms.

....

Apples. Oranges.

That town of Herkimer has 7000 people. That's probably the first time in history those guys ever had to deploy those weapons. There's only x amount of hour available for training because they are needed to patrol the streets. Few police officers ever get anywhere near the firearms training soldiers do.

Police are trained in a myriad of other things that the military is not. Law, social sciences, search and seizure, laws of arrest, accident investigation, etc.

If we sent two soldiers in to handle a fight between a husband and wife they'd probably wind up shooting both of them... because that's what the military is trained to do; eliminate resistance. The similarity that both professions carry firearms is where the comparison ends.

And yes, we *ARE* coming for your reefer.:laugh:

[gabosaurus]

gabby, I suspect you have a little Crush on me....

Well, yeah. You are kind of hot. You remind me of when I was 14 and had this thing for eye candy guys.
That ended when I found someone who I could actually talk to. :cool:

[jimnyc]

Well, yeah. You are kind of hot. You remind me of when I was 14 and had this thing for eye candy guys.
That ended when I found someone who I could actually talk to. :cool:

Darin, I believe she may have just implied that you are a dummy! LOL :poke:

[gabosaurus]

Darin, I believe she may have just implied that you are a dummy! LOL :poke:

Darin is not a dummy! He is merely a male blonde. :p

[aboutime]

Well, yeah. You are kind of hot. You remind me of when I was 14 and had this thing for eye candy guys.
That ended when I found someone who I could actually talk to. :cool:


Good thing you are able to type. And unable to actually talk to anyone. That's how it works for gabby, always with a mouth full.

[Marcus Aurelius]

Good thing you are able to type. And unable to actually talk to anyone. That's how it works for gabby, always with a mouth full.

maybe if she got up off here knees once in a while, she'd get a little more respect.


yeah, I went there.

[Abbey Marie]

maybe if she got up off here knees once in a while, she'd get a little more respect.


yeah, I went there.


Seems to me you "go there" a lot. Why not try showing a little respect for a change? It doesn't cost a thing.

[aboutime]

Seems to me you "go there" a lot. Why not try showing a little respect for a change? It doesn't cost a thing.


Abbey. It appears that TWO WAY STREET THING should go both directions. Guess you haven't been seeing how gabby's posts have been lately. Not defending anyone. But letting gabby get away with showing Little respect isn't exactly what you are asking for here.

[logroller]

Apples. Oranges.


That town of Herkimer has 7000 people. That's probably the first time in history those guys ever had to deploy those weapons. There's only x amount of hour available for training because they are needed to patrol the streets. Few police officers ever get anywhere near the firearms training soldiers do.


Police are trained in a myriad of other things that the military is not. Law, social sciences, search and seizure, laws of arrest, accident investigation, etc.


If we sent two soldiers in to handle a fight between a husband and wife they'd probably wind up shooting both of them... because that's what the military is trained to do; eliminate resistance. The similarity that both professions carry firearms is where the comparison ends.


And yes, we *ARE* coming for your reefer.
Its not as though we're talking about some special tactic; its basic familiarity with the weapon. Literally, one look down the sight should tell you something is awry. extensive training =\= basic familiarity. Talk about apples and oranges.


Is math one of those things police are trained in; making this a word problem?
Let x = number of hours spent familiarizing oneself with their weapon; then x= 0.


And what, pray tell, was the purposed design of the AR-15 platform; settling domestic disputes or eliminating resistance?


I figured out why reefer seizure is such a big issue for you; apparently you guys get stoned before using your weapons.

[Abbey Marie]

Abbey. It appears that TWO WAY STREET THING should go both directions. Guess you haven't been seeing how gabby's posts have been lately. Not defending anyone. But letting gabby get away with showing Little respect isn't exactly what you are asking for here.

Please show me where Gabby has continually made references about others as bad as characterizing a woman as always "on her knees", as a hooker, etc. If that is true, I will retract.

[Robert A Whit]

Please show me where Gabby has continually made references about others as bad as characterizing a woman as always "on her knees", as a hooker, etc. If that is true, I will retract.

He can't. He constantly discusses posters. I think that is much of the problem. I deplore even saying this much. She and I are polar opposites as to politics but thus far she has been not much more than as a mosquito, something needed to be swatted once in a while.

[aboutime]

Please show me where Gabby has continually made references about others as bad as characterizing a woman as always "on her knees", as a hooker, etc. If that is true, I will retract.


Using the words, and excuses of others here. Apples, and Oranges.

[logroller]

Using the words, and excuses of others here. Apples, and Oranges.
Apples and oranges :wtf: ...more like cheese on toast.;) Seriously, you have a cognitive disorder.

[aboutime]

Apples and oranges :wtf: ...more like cheese on toast.;) Seriously, you have a cognitive disorder.


Seriously? Please post your medical license for all to see, then tell us WHO has a disorder.

[Robert A Whit]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by aboutime http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=625007#post625007)

Using the words, and excuses of others here. Apples, and Oranges.






Logroller: Apples and oranges :wtf: ...more like cheese on toast.;) Seriously, you have a cognitive disorder.

Now you did it. Do you want him to tattle on you for picking on him?

[Abbey Marie]

Using the words, and excuses of others here. Apples, and Oranges.

:confused:

[tailfins]

Do you ever talk to the subject?


Subject is: cops are given assault weapons, are free to break laws, bend laws, as if they are somehow better than citizens they "serve". It's silly and dangerous in terms of "liberty".


Our military IS superior to police, in terms of professionalism, training, and all that. Cops dressed like Soldiers will make sheeple more-easily allow a national police force; not to mention violates the purpose of combat uniforms.


gabby, I suspect you have a little Crush on me....

Good post! A national police force is a bad idea. It's worse than letting some crime "slide".


Apples. Oranges.

That town of Herkimer has 7000 people. That's probably the first time in history those guys ever had to deploy those weapons. There's only x amount of hour available for training because they are needed to patrol the streets. Few police officers ever get anywhere near the firearms training soldiers do.

Police are trained in a myriad of other things that the military is not. Law, social sciences, search and seizure, laws of arrest, accident investigation, etc.

If we sent two soldiers in to handle a fight between a husband and wife they'd probably wind up shooting both of them... because that's what the military is trained to do; eliminate resistance. The similarity that both professions carry firearms is where the comparison ends.

And yes, we *ARE* coming for your reefer.http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Cops ACT like they are trained to eliminate resistance. Only in the most liberal of cities is it not the case. Cambridge, Mass. comes to mind.

[logroller]

Seriously? Please post your medical license for all to see, then tell us WHO has a disorder.
Oh good one...except your irrational and illogical posts speak volumes of your cognitive shortcomings. Anyone with intelligence of an average preteen can see you as the idiot you are. I was just giving you the benefit of the doubt that is was physiological; perhaps you're just naturally dumb. Pity for you though, nobody's working on a cure for stupidity.

But hey, if proof of licensure or qualified expert opinion is required to ascertain another's faults, does that mean you're an expert on whores there sailor boy; as a pimp or a john?

[gabosaurus]

If you dislike or distrust police, don't call them next time someone breaks into your home or assaults one of your family members.

[tailfins]

If you dislike or distrust police, don't call them next time someone breaks into your home or assaults one of your family members.


Or at the very least ... hide your weed.

[taft2012]

Its not as though we're talking about some special tactic; its basic familiarity with the weapon. Literally, one look down the sight should tell you something is awry. extensive training =\= basic familiarity. Talk about apples and oranges.


Is math one of those things police are trained in; making this a word problem?
Let x = number of hours spent familiarizing oneself with their weapon; then x= 0.


And what, pray tell, was the purposed design of the AR-15 platform; settling domestic disputes or eliminating resistance?


I figured out why reefer seizure is such a big issue for you; apparently you guys get stoned before using your weapons.

Give the guy a break. He's a cop in a town of 7000 people, which means they probably have about 5 police officers. How much time do you suppose they allot for special weapons training?

He's someone actually making a contribution to society, as opposed to sitting around all day rolling up log-sized spliffs. One thing I'm pretty sure he's proficient at; slapping the cuffs on potheads. :thumb:



Cops ACT like they are trained to eliminate resistance. Only in the most liberal of cities is it not the case. Cambridge, Mass. comes to mind.

By "eliminate resistance" I mean shoot it to pieces.

Where in the USA do the police shoot resistance to pieces? It might have been good television during the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations if they did do that... but they didn't.

[aboutime]

Oh good one...except your irrational and illogical posts speak volumes of your cognitive shortcomings. Anyone with intelligence of an average preteen can see you as the idiot you are. I was just giving you the benefit of the doubt that is was physiological; perhaps you're just naturally dumb. Pity for you though, nobody's working on a cure for stupidity.

But hey, if proof of licensure or qualified expert opinion is required to ascertain another's faults, does that mean you're an expert on whores there sailor boy; as a pimp or a john?


Whatever you say logroller. I was merely doing my best Impressions of you here. You know? Emulating, and attempting to copy your tactics, and techniques.

So. I must totally agree with everything you said, and with every descriptive word you used in my behalf.

I also congratulate you for feeling so confident to express yourself, about yourself with such prowess and tact.

Thank you. Good to know. I no longer need to be LIKE YOU.

[Missileman]

Give the guy a break. He's a cop in a town of 7000 people, which means they probably have about 5 police officers. How much time do you suppose they allot for special weapons training?


Give US a break. He might as well have put the magazine in backwards. If he had actually had to use that weapon it's highly probable that it would not have successfully fulfilled its intended purpose. And maybe I'm being a tad critical, but I would expect a basic understanding of a weapon would be required to carry it. Who knows, maybe in Podunk, they do "rock, paper, scissors" to determine who carries which weapon to a call.

[logroller]

Give the guy a break. He's a cop in a town of 7000 people, which means they probably have about 5 police officers. How much time do you suppose they allot for special weapons training?

He's someone actually making a contribution to society, as opposed to sitting around all day rolling up log-sized spliffs. One thing I'm pretty sure he's proficient at; slapping the cuffs on potheads. :thumb:


Give him a break??? i cant even buy that weapon in my state (population 38 million) because its so dangerous; but of course, police are exempted...so I'd say they're getting the breaks already. Unless he's in a town with population: him; if he can't use the weapon properly, he shouldn't be using it at all, let alone to execute his duties.
So far as log-sized spliffs and his prowess arresting potheads, With the attention to detail he's shown thus far, he's likely to have arrested an actual tree. "Better call for backup, this ones resisting! :laugh:

MG]http://datacenteroverlords.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/barney.jpg[/IMG]
Give US a break. He might as well have put the magazine in backwards. If he had actually had to use that weapon it's highly probable that it would not have successfully fulfilled its intended purpose. And maybe I'm being a tad critical, but I would expect a basic understanding of a weapon would be required to carry it. Who knows, maybe in Podunk, they do "rock, paper, scissors" to determine who carries which weapon to a call.
I think Rock Paper Scissors is how they decide who gets the lucky bullet.
http://datacenteroverlords.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/barney.jpg

[taft2012]

Give US a break. He might as well have put the magazine in backwards. If he had actually had to use that weapon it's highly probable that it would not have successfully fulfilled its intended purpose. And maybe I'm being a tad critical, but I would expect a basic understanding of a weapon would be required to carry it. Who knows, maybe in Podunk, they do "rock, paper, scissors" to determine who carries which weapon to a call.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.... you're the tough, big bad brave guy. A combat veteran who's never made a mistake under fire. :rolleyes:

What you can tell for sure based on the photo is that the guy is a man not afraid to put on a man's uniform.

As opposed to a boy sitting behind a computer monitor playing keyboard warrior.:lol:

[darin]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.... you're the tough, big bad brave guy. A combat veteran who's never made a mistake under fire. :rolleyes:

What you can tell for sure based on the photo is that the guy is a man not afraid to put on a man's uniform.

As opposed to a boy sitting behind a computer monitor playing keyboard warrior.:lol:

The two morons in the picture were not under fire. They were being stupid in a fairly calm situation.

[taft2012]

The two morons in the picture were not under fire. They were being stupid in a fairly calm situation.

They were in a situation that involved trying to take in alive someone who may have already killed someone. Generally, the military doesn't have to worry about taking in alive someone like that. This situation could very easily have turned deadly, which I'm sure is more than you've ever encountered, Bong Boy.

This I know because men who've been in such situations have unflagging respect for others who've done the same.

Generally it's just Bong Boys who sit behind computer screens going "Tee hee! ZOMG, lookit!" :rolleyes:

[darin]

They were in a situation that involved trying to take in alive someone who may have already killed someone. Generally, the military doesn't have to worry about taking in alive someone like that. This situation could very easily have turned deadly, which I'm sure is more than you've ever encountered, Bong Boy.

This I know because men who've been in such situations have unflagging respect for others who've done the same.

Generally it's just Bong Boys who sit behind computer screens going "Tee hee! ZOMG, lookit!" :rolleyes:

No - they were part of an assualt force patiently waiting to be told what to do. They were ill-prepared for even that situation, and display general disregard for the basic fundamentals of safe firearm handling. Throwing in logical fallacy does not strengthen your arguments.

[taft2012]

No - they were part of an assualt force patiently waiting to be told what to do. They were ill-prepared for even that situation, and display general disregard for the basic fundamentals of safe firearm handling. Throwing in logical fallacy does not strengthen your arguments.


How is it unsafe to have a site on a firearm backwards? It is admittedly ineffective, but how is it unsafe? That right there is a logical fallacy, not the fact that they were in a dangerous situation trying to apprehend a murder suspect.

I readily admit I wouldn't know squat about that firearm because I have no training on it. We have a special unit for that, which has an entire day each week dedicated to special weapons training. Of course, the officer in the picture comes from a town of 7000 people, whereas I am part of a department that has 28,000 officers. We have more time and resources available to allow that kind of training.

Toke it up, Bong Boy. Watch the UFC this Saturday night and come back and give us your expert insight about how you're a mixed martial artist. :laugh:

I love the rationale here; "ZOMG! Lookit! A cop in a small upstate New York town put the scope on his gun on backwards! LOL! Clearly the only course moving forward is to legalize marijuana!"

[darin]

How is it unsafe to have a site on a firearm backwards? It is admittedly ineffective, but how is it unsafe?

The bullet would go to a destination other than to where it was aimed.


That right there is a logical fallacy, not the fact that they were in a dangerous situation trying to apprehend a murder suspect.

Prove my claim 'having the sight on backwards is dangerous' is a logical fallacy. YOUR fallacy is not in being wrong, your fallacy is using ad hominem.



I readily admit I wouldn't know squat about that firearm because I have no training on it. We have a special unit for that, which has an entire day each week dedicated to special weapons training. Of course, the officer in the picture comes from a town of 7000 people, whereas I am part of a department that has 28,000 officers. We have more time and resources available to allow that kind of training.

The firearm has nothing to do with the optic placed on it. Training with that firearm wouldn't neccessarily mean training with the optic somebody put on it. EOTech are not standard on any firearm I know of - and EOTech does not produce firearms.



Toke it up, Bong Boy. Watch the UFC this Saturday night and come back and give us your expert insight about how you're a mixed martial artist. :laugh:

I love the rationale here; "ZOMG! Lookit! A cop in a small upstate New York town put the scope on his gun on backwards! LOL! Clearly the only course moving forward is to legalize marijuana!"

Again you are trying to use fallacy to bolster your your position. How nice. (that's sarcasm - that last bit, btw, just so you know).


Here's the over-arching point: Our "Leaders" tell us "Only Police have the training to use 'dangerous' weapons mere 'civilians' cannot have!" yet in this picture we see TWO police officers doing very dangerous and stupid things with firearms...and a midget wearing sunglasses and tactical gear.

Three foolishly trained, or un-trained "experts".

[taft2012]

Here's the over-arching point: Our "Leaders" tell us "Only Police have the training to use 'dangerous' weapons mere 'civilians' cannot have!" yet in this picture we see TWO police officers doing very dangerous and stupid things with firearms...and a midget wearing sunglasses and tactical gear.

Three foolishly trained, or un-trained "experts".

That's your "over-arching point"?

Why did it take you so long to bring it up? Why call the thread "Idiot Cops" then?

I don't disagree that liberal gun control laws are idiotic. I don't see a reason to attack police to prove the point though, especially since police are not legislators and for the most part get nauseous around liberals.

No, you're just a pothead doing some serious backpedaling.

[darin]

That's your "over-arching point"?

Why did it take you so long to bring it up? Why call the thread "Idiot Cops" then?

Because the cops in the picture are idiots. From the OP my point was made.





I don't see a reason to attack police to prove the point though, especially since police are not legislators and for the most part get nauseous around liberals.

I'm also tacking those in the picture for putting the public - and their peers - at risk. They are idiots. Why do you cause nausea around liberals? I guess I understand it - lots of liberals might become nauseated around conservatives, but i've not read it stated quite like that.




No, you're just a pothead doing some serious backpedaling.


And again with the logical fallacy for you.

[gabosaurus]

Some of you who are critical of police should join the force near you. Certainly you are qualified.
Whether you possess the internal fortitude is another question.

[jimnyc]

Some of you who are critical of police should join the force near you. Certainly you are qualified.
Whether you possess the internal fortitude is another question.

I could agree with you if someone were doing so about ALL police. Is that happening? Or is someone, or a few, critical of a portion of police on film or in stories?

[aboutime]

Some of you who are critical of police should join the force near you. Certainly you are qualified.
Whether you possess the internal fortitude is another question.


gabby. YOU are not qualified to even talk about Fortitude. You can't even get the expression correct when you try.

Intestinal....Anyone?

[Missileman]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.... you're the tough, big bad brave guy. A combat veteran who's never made a mistake under fire. :rolleyes:

What you can tell for sure based on the photo is that the guy is a man not afraid to put on a man's uniform.

As opposed to a boy sitting behind a computer monitor playing keyboard warrior.:lol:

Ohhhh! I get it. Cops NEVER make mistakes. Cops are NEVER wrong. And you're the kind of dink who personally attacks anyone who points out that they actually do.

You're a thin-skinned prick who takes the criticism of any cop as a personal insult. Go take a flying leap at a rolling donut, dickhead!

[Missileman]

How is it unsafe to have a site on a firearm backwards? It is admittedly ineffective, but how is it unsafe? That right there is a logical fallacy, not the fact that they were in a dangerous situation trying to apprehend a murder suspect.


Hey tard! Suppose for an instance that he needed to use that weapon accurately to prevent the killing of a fellow officer. How fucking SAFE is his partner?

[cadet]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6Q7a0KAc7U

[aboutime]

What is keeping all of you from just stepping forward, saving the rest of us time, and just admit YOU HATE COPS????

[cadet]

What is keeping all of you from just stepping forward, saving the rest of us time, and just admit YOU HATE COPS????

I think I've made that clear myself.

[aboutime]

I think I've made that clear myself.


And you really expect us to thank you for wanting to join the Air Force?

It seems, from your own admission. You despise rules, or those who administer them.

Can't wish you luck. You've destroyed that already.

[Missileman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6Q7a0KAc7U

With camera rolling, I would have hit that stupid SoB and had a lot of fun in court.

[cadet]

And you really expect us to thank you for wanting to join the Air Force?

It seems, from your own admission. You despise rules, or those who administer them.

Can't wish you luck. You've destroyed that already.

No respect for a program full of jackasses that abuse their power, does not translate to those who fight for their country dippy.

[taft2012]

Ohhhh! I get it. Cops NEVER make mistakes. Cops are NEVER wrong. And you're the kind of dink who personally attacks anyone who points out that they actually do.

You're a thin-skinned prick who takes the criticism of any cop as a personal insult. Go take a flying leap at a rolling donut, dickhead!

Hey dopey, I just said they guy made a mistake. Put the bong down and pay attention.

You're not even worthy of being called a "thin-skinned prick."

You're a drippy smegma-tized foreskin.


Hey tard! Suppose for an instance that he needed to use that weapon accurately to prevent the killing of a fellow officer. How fucking SAFE is his partner?

Hey, smegma breath....

I said he made a mistake.

However, I think once he looked through the backwards optic he just said "Whoops" and quickly fixed it.

Drugged-up smegma boys like yourself think the world shares your perspective, so you and your fellow pothead conservatives think his reaction was like;

"Oh! Wow, dude. Check it out. To the naked eye the target is about 100 yards away, but like, when I look through this it's supposed to get closer but it actually looks like a MILE away or something. Whoa! This is totally freaking me out. I'm gonna have to think about this."

[darin]

Hey dopey, I just said they guy made a mistake. Put the bong down and pay attention.

You're not even worthy of being called a "thin-skinned prick."

You're a drippy smegma-tized foreskin.



Hey, smegma breath....

I said he made a mistake.

However, I think once he looked through the backwards optic he just said "Whoops" and quickly fixed it.

Drugged-up smegma boys like yourself think the world shares your perspective, so you and your fellow pothead conservatives think his reaction was like;

"Oh! Wow, dude. Check it out. To the naked eye the target is about 100 yards away, but like, when I look through this it's supposed to get closer but it actually looks like a MILE away or something. Whoa! This is totally freaking me out. I'm gonna have to think about this."


You are embarassing yourself.

[taft2012]

With camera rolling, I would have shat in my Depends and bawled like a baby.

Fixed that for ya.:thumb:


You are embarassing yourself.

No, frankly I'm embarrassing *YOU*, and loving it. :thumb:

[darin]

No, frankly I'm embarrassing *YOU*, and loving it. :thumb:

I wonder how your mind works; how you throw out logical fallacy after fallacy, stomp and avoid the issues, then claim you are somehow 'winning' this debate?

Crazy.

[taft2012]

I wonder how your mind works; how you throw out logical fallacy after fallacy, stomp and avoid the issues, then claim you are somehow 'winning' this debate?

Crazy.

Enlighten me....

So far I see:

Pothead conservatives: "ZOMG! Lookit, LOL"
Me: "OK, so he made a mistake. You never made a mistake?"
Pothead conservatives: "What? You're saying cops never make mistakes?"
Me: "You guys are high. Come back when you're sober."

[darin]

Enlighten me....

So far I see:

Pothead conservatives: "ZOMG! Lookit, LOL"
Me: "OK, so he made a mistake. You never made a mistake?"
Pothead conservatives: "What? You're saying cops never make mistakes?"
Me: "You guys are high. Come back when you're sober."

I wonder if you are mental; because you are back assward here.

Here's me: Stupid cops - these mofo's wanna be all bad-ass, and they put lives at risk. There's no room for this kind of stupidity in our police forces. Plus, this flies in the face of 'Only our LE are 'trained' to handle high-power weapons!' PLUS - it's an example of tacticool guys showing off.

Here's you: ZOMG! How DARE you criticize ANY cop for ANYTHING!! I'm so butt-hurt about this, I will resort to logical fallacy in an attempt to humiliate you. If I can insult you enough, maybe your valid points will be obscured by my stomping my feet like a petulant child. Copz are GODS!

[taft2012]

I understand marijuana alters perceptions, apparently it can also cause voices in the head.

I never said this. I don't see anybody else in this thread saying this. I've never heard another cop say this. Who exactly is saying this? :rolleyes:

[quote] PLUS - it's an example of tacticool guys showing off.

Ah, jealousy. Buy yourself a nice suit and wash your hair. Maybe you can find yourself a nice girl then.

[darin]

I understand marijuana alters perceptions, apparently it can also cause voices in the head.

I never said this. I don't see anybody else in this thread saying this. I've never heard another cop say this. Who exactly is saying this? :rolleyes:



Ah, jealousy. Buy yourself a nice suit and wash your hair. Maybe you can find yourself a nice girl then.


More logical fallacy; if you want to play foolishly, go to the Cage. If you want to pretend - at LEAST pretend - to be an adult, try bringing value to a thread.

[taft2012]

More logical fallacy; if you want to play foolishly, go to the Cage. If you want to pretend - at LEAST pretend - to be an adult, try bringing value to a thread.

What logical fallacy? Where did you pick that expression up, you're overusing it.

I asked you who is saying what you repeatedly cite? How is that a logical fallacy?

[darin]

What logical fallacy? Where did you pick that expression up, you're overusing it.

I asked you who is saying what you repeatedly cite? How is that a logical fallacy?

Ad hominem is a logical fallacy. Because you probably feel unable to adequately debate your views, you resort to sniping, insults, and ridicule.

You're welcome.

[Jeff]

OK so the cop made a mistake I can accept that but what bothers me is he took a weapon out in the field maybe having to fire it and never zeroed it in? what kind of nit wit mounts a scope of any kind on any gun and doesn't shoot it to see how well the new optics work ?

And yes I seen someone post that the police don't always have time LOL, if ya don't have time to shoot the gun before you might shoot it in public well that just sums up the title of this thread . And I can tell you for a fact at least here in GA the police have plenty of time to hit the range in fact a friend of mine is a deputy and she must qualify yearly so yes she does hit the range quite often .

[Abbey Marie]

I think the important question here is, why make a gun with a scope that can be mounted backwards? Shouldn't it only attach the correct way?

[darin]

I think the important question here is, why make a gun with a scope that can be mounted backwards? Shouldn't it only attach the correct way?


The optic mounts on a rail. Think 'monorail'. There's a tighten screw and a clasp. Short of Front Towards Enemy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claymore_mine) markings, it's pretty hard to mess up.

[Abbey Marie]

The optic mounts on a rail. Think 'monorail'. There's a tighten screw and a clasp. Short of Front Towards Enemy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claymore_mine) markings, it's pretty hard to mess up.


So, the "rail" can accept different types of attachments? I see the logic.

[tailfins]

Seems to me you "go there" a lot. Why not try showing a little respect for a change? It doesn't cost a thing.


You should consider following your own advice, Ms. Bertha Betterthanyou.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbhcEGiLApg

[darin]

You should consider following your own advice, Ms. Bertha Betterthanyou.



Knock that shit off, man. Stop fucking with her.

[jimnyc]

You should consider following your own advice, Ms. Bertha Betterthanyou

Please refrain from such comments towards Abbey. She is not provoking anything towards you and she shouldn't have to receive it from you. All I see these types of comments as is provocation. Just leave it alone.

[aboutime]

Knock that shit off, man. Stop fucking with her.



dmp. Seems tailfins has gotten a little courage from somewhere. Making tailfins sound like another member who GABS.....?

[Missileman]

dmp. Seems tailfins has gotten a little courage from somewhere. Making tailfins sound like another member who GABS.....?

Funny thing...I was thinking same thing, but in regards to a totally different poster.

[tailfins]

Please refrain from such comments towards Abbey. She is not provoking anything towards you and she shouldn't have to receive it from you. All I see these types of comments as is provocation. Just leave it alone.

I guess it's a good thing I have spent most of the day on the back roads of Pennsylvania, eating until it hurts then lying around like a python that just swallowed a goat.

[taft2012]

So, the "rail" can accept different types of attachments? I see the logic.

Now Abbey, after understanding this logic, the next logical progression after this it to conclude: Police Officers make mistakes, so we need to legalize marijuana.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I guess it's a good thing I have spent most of the day on the back roads of Pennsylvania, eating until it hurts then lying around like a python that just swallowed a goat.

Just wait until you eat like a python that has just swallowed a horse! I did that a few weeks ago at my brother's home when he cooked a ton of wild game including venison from last year's kills. Venison, rabbit ,squirrel and gravy , with all the trimmings! Enough food to feed about 80/90 people with only about 23 being there.
The eating pleasure(wild game expertly cooked, my mom helped ) was worth the later temporary pain--a large horse it felt like. -Tyr

[jimnyc]

Now Abbey, after understanding this logic, the next logical progression after this it to conclude: Police Officers make mistakes, so we need to legalize marijuana.

Honest question, and not starting or getting involved in any arguments - why is everything about marijuana? I understand as a former officer of the law that you are against things illegal, but why every other post here in politics? I don't think anyone here even smokes.

[taft2012]

Honest question, and not starting or getting involved in any arguments - why is everything about marijuana? I understand as a former officer of the law that you are against things illegal, but why every other post here in politics? I don't think anyone here even smokes.

It's quite simple James. Watch these alleged libertarians long enough with a discriminating eye and you'll eventually arrive at the same conclusion. Issues are generally addressed with boilerplate... except marijuana and law enforcement, which gets their blood flowing because at that point they're speaking their genuine liberal minds.

They're all over the place; GOP primary debates, radio talk shows, political forums, yet somehow these individuals never collectively represent any significant turnout anywhere for libertarians. That's because when it comes time to vote they run back to their liberal bases.

[jimnyc]

It's quite simple James. Watch these alleged libertarians long enough with a discriminating eye and you'll eventually arrive at the same conclusion. Issues are generally addressed with boilerplate... except marijuana and law enforcement, which gets their blood flowing because at that point they're speaking their genuine liberal minds.

They're all over the place; GOP primary debates, radio talk shows, political forums, yet somehow these individuals never collectively represent any significant turnout anywhere for libertarians. That's because when it comes time to vote they run back to their liberal bases.

But who HERE do you think displays these characteristics? I think we have a small handful of those who claim to be libertarians here, but no pot smokers that I am aware of.