Town Hall Meeting: INGO and Law Enforcement

[j706]

Secret LEO forum here? There is none...and I would know.

Secret forum? WTH?

 

[88GT]

INGO already has rules in place to govern the behavior of it's membership. As members we agreed to abide by those rules.

I don't believe I've ever witnessed a member being banned that didn't appear to be begging for it. Now granted...the banning may or may not have been precluded by multiple warnings...but the one or two that didn't were obviously a violation of those rules and clearly would have painted INGO in a light that no one that I know wants it to be associated with.

I'm well aware that people will disagree. And sometimes those disagreements will become heated. But if it cannot be done without threatening death or name-calling...then perhaps some individuals need to reevaluate the manner in which they disagree.

If an individual cannot go to another man's home (INGO) and behave in a civil and appropriate manner, then perhaps they should stay at their own home where they're free to behave however they wish.

I don't worry too much about out of control Mods banning anyone that doesn't deserve it. They appear to have a pretty good handle on it. We're not always going to agree with their decisions...I've got the infraction to prove it.

Your point is irrelevant; accurate, but irrelevant. While I agree with the "it's not what you say, it's how you say it" argument you make, this isn't about how we say things. For some around here, it's enough that we say anything critical at all. They simply can't (won't) distinguish between criticism/evaluation of the use of LE as an agent of the state (and the manner in which that is done) and attacks on LEOs simple for the sake of being LEO. The two are vastly different. And despite the repeated claims by others to that effect, it apparently yields some benefit for those who keep barking up that tree.

 

[public servant]

Would you also agree that there are some members with an opposing point of view that come running to a thread that they know has a heated discussion going on and start posting things that fan the flame and they obviously know it will get some people worked up even that much more?

Yep...I've done it and so have you...along with several other people. I think it's exactly the reaction some want. It doesn't make it right, however.

As I've stated many times...I have no problem with heated discussions until they result in violent threats and name calling. I saw neither in your example. This is also probably a good example of what you're talking about.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/1983872-post99.html

In defense of you and I...I don't believe we've ever threatened to kill anyone or wished death upon them here.

 

[RichardR]

Meh, there are always going to be some folks who are always going to be trying to control what other folks say or do, for some reason or another.

 

[public servant]

Your point is irrelevant; accurate, but irrelevant. While I agree with the "it's not what you say, it's how you say it" argument you make, this isn't about how we say things. For some around here, it's enough that we say anything critical at all. They simply can't (won't) distinguish between criticism/evaluation of the use of LE as an agent of the state (and the manner in which that is done) and attacks on LEOs simple for the sake of being LEO. The two are vastly different. And despite the repeated claims by others to that effect, it apparently yields some benefit for those who keep barking up that tree.

Damnit...and here I thought I had the world's problems solved.

I have no desire to squash the ability of anyone to post a thread pointing out the wrong-doings in LE. I think many of these threads have legitimate, good points. I also believe some folks start or go to these threads intentionally only to stir the pot. I also think a few people start these threads only to cause issues.

From my point of view...it's generally not difficult to pick out these threads and posts. I think this is what Fenway is talking about. I have no complaints with posts/threads such as..."I think this cop/department was wrong because...". My problem is with the posts/threads such as "**** the police...someone should kill all the bastards. They're all the same...crooked, lying bastards".

Would you agree that some of the LE threads here are started merely to stir the pot?

Does anyone agree that Fenway is just riding the slurpwagon...as it was so delicately put?

 

[public servant]

Secret LEO forum here? There is none...and I would know.

Secret forum? WTH?

It's like the secret hand shakes and secret gang signs. They don't exist...but cool as hell to think about.

 

[KG1]

Yep...I've done it and so have you...along with several other people. I think it's exactly the reaction some want. It doesn't make it right, however.

As I've stated many times...I have no problem with heated discussions until they result in violent threats and name calling. I saw neither in your example. This is also probably a good example of what you're talking about.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/1983872-post99.html

In defense of you and I...I don't believe we've ever threatened to kill anyone or wished death upon them here.

Would you agree that some of the LE threads here are started merely to stir the pot?

Does anyone agree that Fenway is just riding the slurpwagon...as it was so delicately put?

See this is where you went off the tracks. I raised a legit issue and you used my post as your example, which I do not have a problem with and was'nt claiming to be exempt. You might have also noted that I withdrew that comment myself and stated the reason for the edit but then you turned around and make the comment in your second post that seems counter productive to the original point I was trying to make.

 

[public servant]

See this is where you went off the tracks. I raised a legit issue and you used my post as your example, which I do not have a problem with and was'nt claiming to be exempt. You might have also noted that I withdrew that comment myself and stated the reason for the edit but then you turned around and make the comment in your second post that seems counter productive to the original point I was trying to make.

It's not counter productive at all. It goes to prove one of my points. While we're all willing to point the finger at the other side...we hate it when the finger comes full circle and points back at us. Your reaction was just as I thought it would be. "It's not me...it's them." Don't feel bad...I've had the same reaction before.

And I feel I gave you a legitimate answer... We *all* create part of the problem...but most us us refuse to accept that as reality. If we concerned ourselves with our own faults...perhaps we'd be too busy to point out the shortcomings of others.

You know..."Those who live in glass houses..."

 

[KG1]

It's not counter productive at all. It goes to prove one of my points. While we're all willing to point the finger at the other side...we hate it when the finger comes full circle and points back at us. Your reaction was just as I thought it would be. "It's not me...it's them." Don't feel bad...I've had the same reaction before.

And I feel I gave you a legitimate answer... We *all* create part of the problem...but most us us refuse to accept that as reality. If we concerned ourselves with our own faults...perhaps we'd be too busy to point out the shortcomings of others.

You know..."Those who live in glass houses..."

Never said I had an issue with you pointing out that we are all guilty of an infraction at times. What I do take issue with is the extent that you took it with your last comment to make a point that was never originaly made the way that you worded it to include Fenway. But hey i'm not looking to make it personal here so i'm just gonna leave it alone.

 

[public servant]

Never said I had an issue with you pointing out that we are all guilty of an infraction at times. What I do take issue with is the extent that you took it with your last comment to make a point that was never originaly made the way that you worded it to include Fenway. But hey i'm not looking to make it personal here so i'm just gonna leave it alone.

My post wasn't made to insinuate you think that Fenway was "riding the slurpwagon" which I can only assume is the equivalent of holster sniffing? (Don't knock it...I've met some pretty hot holster sniffers)

That was my post and I'll take responsibility for it. I'm pretty sure Fenway has a sense of humor. Hell...look around...how could he not have?

But I will add...that when you use that phrase in a derogatory context...you've already made it personal. Not to me...but to the person you made it to. I will add that I understand your post was intended to get even for another post directed at you.

My entire point was that you took issue with a post that j706 made...but you turn around and accuse someone of "riding the slurpwagon". And then when I point that out...you take issue with it. Don't take it personally...it wasn't intended that way....we've all done it....and I really don't have issues with it until it comes to name calling and threats....that's when the hammer should fall...IMO, of course.

And for the record...that's not referring to your post. Most days, I've been insulted better than that before most people get out of bed.

 

[E5RANGER375]

Secret LEO forum here? There is none...and I would know.

no its not an INGO forum. im sure uncle mike has already let you know about it. if not PM him you have a badge so you will be happily invited in. (i dont mean that in any derogatory way towards you Denny. i respect you)

 

[E5RANGER375]

Secret forum? WTH?

I dont even think THEY would let YOU in.

 

[goinggreyfast]

Good Lord! Is this thread STILL going? Have we solved the world's problems yet, or are we still just discussing them? Just askin...

 

[public servant]

I dont even think THEY would let YOU in.

He's a member there...you're not.

Denounce your rangership and I'll see what I can do.

 

[UncleMike]

He's a member there...you're not.

Denounce your rangership and I'll see what I can do.

Uuummmmmm..................
No!
And
Over 1/3 of the members aren't LEO's.

 

[Gabriel]

Uuummmmmm..................
No!

 

[PatriotPride]

This applies to both sides, the members that post and rant about "every little LEO related thing" and the LEO's that feel meaningful posts contribute to the forum regardless of the topic. But, if someone can't be civil then perhaps they shouldn't post in LEO related topics.

I agree it applies to both sides. There will be a legitimate thread posted, and a non-LEO may go overboard and start painting with a broad brush, and at other times you have an LEO who gets overly butthurt that someone dared discuss a wrong-doing by a member of Law Enforcement. I do agree that if someone simply can't contain themselves from making wild accusation and making snide idiotic remarks, then they shouldn't post in those threads. All they do is embarrass themselves.

 

[KG1]

My post wasn't made to insinuate you think that Fenway was "riding the slurpwagon" which I can only assume is the equivalent of holster sniffing? (Don't knock it...I've met some pretty hot holster sniffers)

That was my post and I'll take responsibility for it. I'm pretty sure Fenway has a sense of humor. Hell...look around...how could he not have?

But I will add...that when you use that phrase in a derogatory context...you've already made it personal. Not to me...but to the person you made it to. I will add that I understand your post was intended to get even for another post directed at you.

My entire point was that you took issue with a post that j706 made...but you turn around and accuse someone of "riding the slurpwagon". And then when I point that out...you take issue with it. Don't take it personally...it wasn't intended that way....we've all done it....and I really don't have issues with it until it comes to name calling and threats....that's when the hammer should fall...IMO, of course.

And for the record...that's not referring to your post. Most days, I've been insulted better than that before most people get out of bed.

Fair enough and for the record I have no personal beef with j706, you can search the forum and you won't find any evidence to the contrary. I only used his post as an example because it was made in the context of the discussion that was going on in that particular thread and it also relates to the intent of this town hall discussion of percieved LEO bashing and what perpetuates it..

 

[Denny347]

no its not an INGO forum. im sure uncle mike has already let you know about it. if not PM him you have a badge so you will be happily invited in. (i dont mean that in any derogatory way towards you Denny. i respect you)

Oh...THAT forum. I did not realize UM=Uncle Mike...duh. It's all good.

 

[USMC_0311]

I dont even think THEY would let YOU in.