Chucktshoes

I haven't seen too much glamorization of drug use or production in BB. In fact unless you consider the depiction of the lucrative nature of the distribution business as glamorous, the show is decidedly unglamorous in its storyline. The show has depicted the fall of, if not a good man, at least a decent man into a monster.

Nancy Mace, the first female grad of The Citidel, has declared as a primary challenger for the seat held by Sen. Lindsay Graham. I love it when Cavuto referred to Graham as a RINO. :lol: http://video.foxnews.com/v/2586947693001/first-female-citadel-grad-challenging-sen-grahams-seat/

I recognize this debate! It's the one where Republican apologists stake out the position of voting against the Democrats for fear of the harm they cause and libertarians attempt to explain that there is no functional difference between the parties and that they are both controlled by progressives that think it is perfectly ok to use the government to legislate control of how other people live their lives and spend their money. The libertarians eventually lose patience and get snarky, the Republican apologists get offended and there are tears and recriminations for weeks on end. Cue the butthurt in 3...2...1...

I get fewer funny looks than I used to when I say things like "public education isn't designed to give knowledge" and "if you want to educate your kids, do it yourself". http://johntaylorgatto.com/underground/. <- Read this book.

You read it right. In fact, you can even imbibe as long as you aren't in a bar or the bar area and you don't get drunk.

Yes.

He only got a warning? Still no #justice4Trayvon!

Accepting what you said at face value, the case/rifle were secured enough that the officers were unable to open the chamber.

You looking to get cut? I'm Irish and Mexican, so you keep saying shit like that and I will. Just let me finish my beer first.

Good Lord, I hope I didn't just give him any ideas. :lol:

That could certainly lead to some interesting bedfellows. :lol:

Robert, for the most part I like Rand. I have become uneasy with some of his positions as of late, but I am generally favorably inclined towards him. That being said, I don't think you should vote for him if you don't want to. I still maintain that no matter how unlikely your choice is to win, the only vote wasted is the vote cast not from conscience but fear. We should all be voting FOR someone, not AGAINST someone.

Just as a question of curiosity, how would the TN Firearms Firearms Act affect the enforcement of a the federal law by state agents such as MNPD? I know he is an FFL/SOT and that the suppressor was legally owned under those rules, but what if the officers had opened up the case and the suppressor had "Made in TN" stamped on it? Would the officers be correct for effecting an arrest for a federal statute that is in conflict with the state statutes that they are commissioned to enforce? While most agree that the TFFA is unenforceable against federal agents, would it not have an impact on state commissioned LEO?

I do agree on his intent, I think I already mentioned that. People were alarmed, they called police and then they intervened. Two different groups of folks with different ROE. Even though he intentionally dressed in a manner to elicit concern and draw a police intervention, if he did not break any laws, he has to be allowed to continue on his way. I would have been ok with him getting cuffed and stuffed for whatever the charge is for inciting a panic. Let the courts work out whether or not that one would stick, but I think the officers would have been covered for making that arrest. They didn't make that arrest, maybe they know something we don't on that front, but I think that would have been a reasonable course of action to everyone. I know I wouldn't have to find myself appearing to defend the assnugget.

The bad part is that he doesn't have to do battle with the entire city at once, he only has to keep probing until he finds the wrong officer on the wrong day and then, cha-ching! The taxpayers lose.

See, I might see the same thing and think he is a mall ninja doing exercise. What's his demeanor? Gonna take that into account as well. Too many variables to list, gonna trust my gut. Of course all of that is moot with regard to the police actions, they knew who they were dealing with.

And in states where the carrying of a loaded long arm is not a crime, places like Wyoming, or Virginia.

You'd be wrong in that. That's me. :D

Add me to that list as well.

This is an entirely reasonable and prudent measure. I would wholeheartedly support this action.

All very good points. I also agree that he doesn't deserve a dime for his fishing expedition. If it is determined that the officers violated his rights/ the law they absolutely should be held accountable for the reason that they made the decision to take the bait. The only thing that causes me to hesitate to fully condemn Voldemort is that the laws he is walking the edge of breaking are illegitimate. Those 27 words in the 2nd Amendment are the only thing separating the actions (not the intent, that is the same in both scenarios) of what Voldemort did and what you just described.

If an average joe had made that assumption and engaged him, we'd be having a different conversation. Instead, LE handled the matter. That will play out however it is going to play out. It still doesn't make an individually directed act of aggression the same thing as an unwise, probably generally alarming but perfectly legal activity.

1) The weapon wasn't loaded. If it had been he would have been charged with that as it is illegal in this state. 2) There is a distinct difference between an action that is generally alarming, yet legal (what Voldemort did) and a specific act of aggression against an individual. That has been my main point from the beginning. You are equating the two and they are not the same thing. That is why your argument was fatally flawed from the start. For the most part I agree with you in regards to our dear friend Voldy. I don't like his lawsuit fishing, his tactics or the possible end outcomes of his shenanigans. I was just trying to get you to bring a better game if you were going to call him or those that may support him out.

I didn't miss your point about Voldemort's actions, I addressed it and agreed with it. I have simply been debating with you about the poorly constructed and inapplicable nature of the argument you presented. As far as the idea that I am "confusing action with reaction" in viewing certain words as aggression, or even outright violence, I will let the words of the SCOTUS speak for me. The concept that words can be aggressive enough on their own to be considered an act of violence is the basis for anti-bullying, sexual harassment and other forms of civilly and criminally actionable damage. It is the primary basis on which 1st Amemndment limitations are built.

I hope he doesn't take the blatant flame bait either, I hold TMF in fairly high regard myself. Other than his willingness to accept battlefield tactics applied stateside (reference the drone debates) he seems like a cat I could have a beer with. No matter much someone is respected, they say something dumb or make a really crap argument. This was one of those cases. :D :lol: