PDA

View Full Version : bad juju in the legal forum


treelogger
06-05-2006, 9:07 PM
I think the under-the-beltline remarks about Iggy Chinn's and Alison Merrilees in the "bad juju at local gun range... " discussion are

in bad taste
totally uncalled for
unproductive
make calguns look like a bunch of teenage boys in puberty run the place
can easily act to make the DoJ mad (justifiable so)
make us look bad.


The same goes for the thread that discusses Iggy's professional past, which is full of innuendo.

I suggest that an admin or moderator first clean up the mess there, and second please admonish the people who've been playing in the mud to clean up their acts. I deliberately mean to include both newbies and very respected regular posters. I understand that it is easy to miffed at Iggy's and Alisons often destructive, uninformed, immoral or borderline illegal actions. This doesn't mean that we can insult them personally. It doesn't matter what they look like, what they do in bed, with whom, or what their professional careers have been. What matters is whether they are speaking the truth (from a legal point of view), and if not, how we can correct it.

EBWhite
06-05-2006, 10:44 PM
I don't think it creates a problem. Those people at the DOJ are the problem. They are worthless and will never be on our side. By venting it makes us feel better and as long as it doesnt get to out of hand, a little fun never hurts. It's much better than not saying anything out of political correctness.

chickenfried
06-05-2006, 10:49 PM
IMO it's nothing to get your panties in a bundle over. If you don't like it don't read or participate in those threads.

CALI-gula
06-05-2006, 11:20 PM
As always, I posted facts and excerpts from ACTUAL QUOTES or ACTUAL ACCOUNTS by those very same people, by which they look like fools or over-zealous Anti-2nd Amendment biased DOJ representatives, in going beyond the scope of their jobs, by which WE are their employers.

You are telling me it is OK for people with little to any knowledge of firearms to be the Assistant Deputy of the Firearm division? Hey, if one operates machinery while cutting lawns does that mean they are qualified to operate the machinery at a nuclear power plant?

You are telling me it is OK for Bill Lockyer to go out of his way to align himself with the Million Moms March organization but just as OK for him to express a loud repugnance for the NRA openly in the media? Especially when in addressing the "Million Moms" he is PERSONALLY calling to pass bills like "AB 352, authored by Assemblymember Paul Koretz (D-West Hollywood), which would require microstamping of semiautomatic handguns and give police a new tool to identify the purchaser of guns later trafficked to criminals and/or used in crimes."

http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/release.php?id=1304

I feel in a Gun Rights Forum it would only be a requirement for me to make others aware that OUR employees are not working for us with an equality in justice, but instead are working to BACK laws against out 2nd Amendment Rights.

I will continue to post threads like this AND similar threads as I have posted about various representatives and others running for or holding political office. My current favorite to bash is Mike Feuer running a campaign to replace Paul Koretz as Assemblymember of the 42nd District. All of it is true; all of it is DISTURBING!!

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=35108

blkA4alb
06-06-2006, 12:27 AM
In a lot of ways I agree with you treelogger. The majority of it is crude.

five.five-six
06-06-2006, 12:45 AM
In a lot of ways I agree with you treelogger. The majority of it is crude.


agreed. I think that they are not all that conserned with us and our toys.. probabaly wish we would just stop bothering them and fill our safes with lowers till our hearts content... obvoiusly none of the 10k oll owners have commited a crime with one or it would be front page

chris
06-06-2006, 2:53 AM
I have to say we have the right to bash our government. They (DOJ) have performed poorly in their jobs. They are overreaching the scope of the job. The DOJ derserves to be bashed. If they read it then fine. I have not found anyone threatening them here.

RRangel
06-06-2006, 4:04 AM
You have a right to disagree with your government. You do not have a right to post unacceptable material in this forum.

Stay on topic, and at least be tasteful.

sac7000
06-06-2006, 6:43 AM
I don't think it creates a problem. Those people at the DOJ are the problem. They are worthless and will never be on our side. By venting it makes us feel better and as long as it doesnt get to out of hand, a little fun never hurts. It's much better than not saying anything out of political correctness.


I agree, we are not out to humiliate our government leaders, we are merely exercising our free speech rights granted to us by the Constitution of the United States.

However, Calguns is NOT a un-moderated public forum. It is paid for by a private citizen(s) who has provided a place where public comment regarding current events can be posted for all to see. The owner(s) have the legal right to control content as they see fit and I fully agree with their right to do so.

Therefore unless directed otherwise, I shall keep personal opinions of colour limited to private emails and the un-moderated newsgroup, alt.guns

And for what it's worth, I still think Alison is a stone fox! Woohoo!

glen avon
06-06-2006, 7:22 AM
I did not find the thread humiliating at all. bill was self-effacing in his humor, and everybody thinks buttless chaps are funny.

somebody said they thought Iggy had been a good cop in oakland.

both pix of "alison" were nice, neither was in bad tatse. one was reaallllllly nice.

normally I am very cautious about going too far, but I think that thread is pretty funny and I don't think it is offensive. immature, sure, but that's funny sometimes.

VeryCoolCat
06-06-2006, 10:11 AM
I agree on the part upon where posting of information that was deemed inappropriate i.e. question of sexual preferences and inuendos,

But to questions a government employees professional past to determine whether or not he is fit for the job is not profane, sometimes people turn it that way.

I was asking so that perhaps we could levi a complaint against the state for appointing people who are not properly able to do their job.

I mean having a lawyer or a politician talk about firearms when they know nothing about them is like watching a child talk about guns based on facts from video games.

rkt88edmo
06-06-2006, 6:18 PM
I think the under-the-beltline remarks about Iggy Chinn's and Alison Merrilees in the "bad juju at local gun range... " discussion are

in bad taste
totally uncalled for
unproductive
make calguns look like a bunch of teenage boys in puberty run the place
can easily act to make the DoJ mad (justifiable so)
make us look bad.



Yup, welcome to the monkeyhouse that has replaced calguns.net.

6172crew
06-06-2006, 6:46 PM
I take it back, he probably doesnt wear chaps. :confused: My only beef with the guy is the quotes that the newspaper had of him saying a .22lr would go through armour, but who knows Im sure he was mis-quoted like they always do to us.

He was going to name the receivrs and seemed to be doing his job but he is a cop and he does lie to folks at gun shows includding trying to get you to sell a rifle to him without going through the steps.

Making fun of the Govt is fun but I can see how some of you guys dont think so and it is Ramons website.

NorCal MedTac
06-06-2006, 7:24 PM
Wait a second I missed pictures. I love pictures. I truly believe that most of the comments made were, well funny. Who cares I really dont belive that anyone takes assless chaps seriously. Actually I do but that is a picture you don't want to see.

socalguns
06-06-2006, 8:48 PM
gossip is.
:)

jdberger
06-07-2006, 12:09 AM
Bah!

Treelogger, thou dost protest too much.

This is the purest form of political speech. The heinous, the puerile, the offensive, the immature - THIS is the speech protected by our 1A. The burning of an enemy in effigy, physically or figuratively - reducing them to the basest of charictaristics (sp), destroying their credibility by attacking their person...........

Highbrow political thinkum-thinkum is easy to protect - "it is noble", Serves a higher goal, educates the vast unwashed lot of us - -

but it is the truly offensive and wounding barbs that are truly protected - because they are most in need of protection.....

(Golly, with the rise of PC, I think that the 90's are my most hated decade...)