Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;442465]There should have been no net effect on your points, I gave you neg rep and then deleted it.[/QUOTE]

Well then, I don't get how I can go from 35ish, to -9 to 15ish. Having 35ish points, then 1 negative rep comment from you brings me to -9, (that's over 45 points I dropped) then when you deleted it, I went back to 15 or 17 or so (I don't recall the exact figures). This was back when we first started this and we both had 1 green block, so your comments should not have weighed that heavily. Maybe when you were deleting you deleted some other points from me, I don't know. I'm going to take you at your word that you didn't do anything on purpose like that, but you certainly inadvertantly changed the points somehow.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=firstdown;442471]There is a big difference in dog discpline and dog beating. The way you make it sound is that he is beating his dog just because he likes to beat on his dog.[/QUOTE]

Thank you. That's how I took it too.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=mredskins;442470]I didn't say horrible and this is my favorite site, I come every day. My PERCEPTION at times is that the mods on here sometimes go on power trips.[/QUOTE]

That's a better comment. Yes, it is true. But like I said, they are human too. They can't be perfect all the time.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=jsarno;442468]Matty, this is the last PM we had:

I wrote:



you wrote back:

Giving me 1 negative rep is fine, but what I was upset about it how you dropped me an unfair amount because it was you that was upset. A non mod or non admin can only give 1 negative rep comment (depending on how many points they have will determine how much you fall) and that was what I would have expected back then. Just cause you have the power to edit / add / delete rep points doesn't mean you should.

I've usually enjoyed your posts here matty, and like I have told you before, you were the reason I came back to this site after my daughter died. I have respect for you, all I ask for is fairness and everyone have the rules applied to them equally.[/quote]

I deleted our reps because after discussing it I thought it was the right thing to do and you seemed to agree. If you continued to have a problem with that why didn't you just say so? Instead we're rehashing this what... several months afterwards? Hell I don't even remember when that was exactly and I thought it was a dead issue.

That's the only time I've ever even touched the rep points, because honestly I really don't even care about them. Too much is made of the rep points around here anyway. I don't understand how that situation wasn't fair in the end.

I didn't give you an unfair amount, as an admin I have more points, and there are other factors involved that can increase your rep power whether you are a mod or not. I don't appreciate that you seem to be insinuating that I unfairly manipulated the system, because as I said I don't even care enough about rep points to do that, and the bottom line is that's not how I operate as an admin.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=firstdown;442471]There is a big difference in dog discpline and dog beating. The way you make it sound is that he is beating his dog just because he likes to beat on his dog.[/quote]

Let's be clear, he's the one that originally said he beat his dogs. Beating is a pretty harsh word to me that that's why I asked if he really did that. If he had said discipline I wouldn't even have thought twice.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=mredskins;442470]I didn't say horrible and this is my favorite site, I come every day. My PERCEPTION at times is that the mods on here sometimes go on power trips.[/quote]

What exactly is a power trip?

Again, let's be specific and not just toss around loose accusations.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;442477]I deleted our reps because after discussing it I thought it was the right thing to do and you seemed to agree. If you continued to have a problem with that why didn't you just say so? Instead we're rehashing this what... several months afterwards? Hell I don't even remember when that was exactly and I thought it was a dead issue.

That's the only time I've ever even touched the rep points, because honestly I really don't even care about them. Too much is made of the rep points around here anyway. I don't understand how that situation wasn't fair in the end.

I didn't give you an unfair amount, as an admin I have more points, and there are other factors involved that can increase your rep power whether you are a mod or not. I don't appreciate that you seem to be insinuating that I unfairly manipulated the system, because as I said I don't even care enough about rep points to do that, and the bottom line is that's not how I operate as an admin.[/QUOTE]

I actually thought you deleted the extra points that were given to me. (35ish to -9) but left your negative rating which left me at 15 or 17. WHich is why I didn't think it was any big deal. Like I said, you are more than welcome to give me negative rep points, but I felt the part that was unfair was dropping me from 35ish to -9. That can't happen with just 1 person giving negative points, and at that time you were the only person that gave me a negative rep.
I hear what you're saying in terms of deleting negative comments, but I just don't understand how I can go from 35ish to -9 to 15-17ish.
Like I said, judging by your comments, I feel you were not doing this on purpose, but somehow you did accidentally drop me by half back then.

I agree with you about rep points. There are a few here with 1 box that are quality posters, and there are few here (1 in particular) that has multiple boxes when they should be in the red, or have very few positive ratings. I never liked this system, and I would vote against it if the issue was ever brought up.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;442482]Let's be clear, he's the one that originally said he beat his dogs. Beating is a pretty harsh word to me that that's why I asked if he really did that. If he had said discipline I wouldn't even have thought twice.[/QUOTE]

That was the 1 and only time I used that word. Maybe I chose the wrong word there, but I figured I built up a comment base that someone wouldn't take that word so personally.
such as:
[quote]I disagree 100%.
Look at a dog. If he pees on the carpet and you let it go, he will continue to do so. If you shove his nose in it, [b]spank him[/b] and throw him outside, he eventually learns not to do it.
If you cut the hand off a person that steals, and others watch it, do you seriously think that won't deter others from stealing? I certainly do. [b]Punishment[/b] absolutely prevents issues if the punishment is severe enough.[/quote]
So I apologize for using the word "beating" one time. Given the arguments in the past about how I am an animal lover and give more money to animal related charities than human related, I figured it wouldn't be taken out of context.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=Mattyk72;442484]What exactly is a power trip?

Again, let's be specific and not just toss around loose accusations.[/quote]

Ok I would say at times that you guys bully up on people if their ideas don't match yours.

Playing games with the rep points as Jsanro has been saying.

Changing people's quotes at the bottom of their post (this has happen to me) as retaliation, to say something stupid about the person.

Again this is all my PERCEPTION, doesn't mean it is reality and I for the most part enjoy this site.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=mredskins;442489]Ok I would say at times that you guys bully up on people if their ideas don't match yours.

Playing games with the rep points as Jsanro has been saying.

Changing people's quotes at the bottom of their post (this has happen to me) as retaliation, to say something stupid about the person.

Again this is all my PERCEPTION, doesn't mean it is reality and I for the most part enjoy this site.[/quote]

I'd say your perception is definitely not reality.

I might as well just stop posting my opinions I guess, because apparently if I disagree with someone I'm a bully.

No games were played with the rep system I think that's quite clear.

I've never touched anyone's posts/quotes/whatever to make fun of them, what exactly are you talking about?

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=jsarno;442488]That was the 1 and only time I used that word. Maybe I chose the wrong word there, but I figured I built up a comment base that someone wouldn't take that word so personally.
such as:

So I apologize for using the word "beating" one time. Given the arguments in the past about how I am an animal lover and give more money to animal related charities than human related, I figured it wouldn't be taken out of context.[/quote]

Like I said beating is a pretty strong word to me and what caused me to reply. If you didn't mean it in that matter fine, but it is what it is. No need to apologize, if this is simply a case of a poor choice of a word, no big deal.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=Mattyk72;442490]I'd say your perception is definitely not reality.

I might as well just stop posting my opinions I guess, because apparently if I disagree with someone I'm a bully.

No games were played with the rep system I think that's quite clear.

I've never touched anyone's posts/quotes/whatever to make fun of them, what exactly are you talking about?[/quote]

Ask SGG about the last it was a while back when SS was thinking of changing his name back to SS.

No worries, I am done with my rant.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

PM me if you don't wish to talk about it here.

Sorry everyone for getting this thread way off topic.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Lady Brave;442406][B]As far as house training goes. Shoving your dog's nose in his own urine and smacking it basically tells the dog that urinating is bad, not that the location he did it in is bad.[/B][/QUOTE]

Exactly. It will teach them to hide it.

If a dog pees in the house, it's not the dog's fault. You have to take the dog outside and wait (however long it takes!) for the dog to go. When the dog goes, you praise him - a treat usually works best:). It will learn that by going outside, it is doing what you want. If you smack it for peeing inside, it will say "crap, I better stop peeing when he's around".

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=mredskins;442493]Ask SGG about the last it was a while back when SS was thinking of changing his name back to SS.

No worries, I am done with my rant.[/QUOTE]

When I started that light hearted thread about what to do with my username. I recall you telling me to get a life and some other not as nice things. SGG (as a moderator) PM'd you to tell you to cool it. You then posted his PRIVATE message to you in the PUBLIC thread and called him out on it. Again, as best as I recall. But anyway, I'm cool to move on from that.

As for the mods having power trips and bullying people who don't agree with us. In the words of Heathcliff Huxtable, that's the dumbest thing I've heard in my life! I'm quite frankly sick and tired of that accusation being hurled at us. In case you guys haven't noticed the mods don't all have one opinion on everything. Matty and I disagree on politics, Matty and I disagree with SGG on Chad Johnson. Gmanc and TMC disagree on Santana Moss (I think). And so on. So let's just stop with that misconception that we go around bullying people.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=mredskins;442493]Ask SGG about the last it was a while back when SS was thinking of changing his name back to SS.

No worries, I am done with my rant.[/QUOTE]

I never changed your sig and I don't even have the ability to do so. I also do not recall ever touching your posts, profile, etc. So, please PM me and let me know what I did.

Are you really upset about that "episode?" I incorrectly thought you took SS' name and I apologize, but I do not think I did anything inappropriate. I'm honestly perplexed that this is even an issue.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=SmootSmack;442509]When I started that light hearted thread about what to do with my username. I recall you telling me to get a life and some other not as nice things. SGG (as a moderator) PM'd you to tell you to cool it. You then posted his PRIVATE message to you in the PUBLIC thread and called him out on it. Again, as best as I recall. But anyway, I'm cool to move on from that.

As for the mods having power trips and bullying people who don't agree with us. In the words of Heathcliff Huxtable, that's the dumbest thing I've heard in my life! I'm quite frankly sick and tired of that accusation being hurled at us. In case you guys haven't noticed the mods don't all have one opinion on everything. Matty and I disagree on politics, Matty and I disagree with SGG on Chad Johnson. Gmanc and TMC disagree on Santana Moss (I think). And so on. So let's just stop with that misconception that we go around bullying people.[/quote]

There's plenty that we all disagree on, I think it's funny that people seem to think we all share the same views. They clearly are not paying attention.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=SmootSmack;442509]As for the mods having power trips and bullying people who don't agree with us. In the words of Heathcliff Huxtable, that's the dumbest thing I've heard in my life! I'm quite frankly sick and tired of that accusation being hurled at us. In case you guys haven't noticed the mods don't all have one opinion on everything. Matty and I disagree on politics, Matty and I disagree with SGG on Chad Johnson. Gmanc and TMC disagree on Santana Moss (I think). And so on. So let's just stop with that misconception that we go around bullying people.[/QUOTE]

Let me second SS' sentiments. Trust me, the mods often disagree as to the state of the Skins, front office moves, political issues, etc.

As for piling on people, we don't check our opinions at the door the second we put our mod hats on. Sometimes, frankly, people deserved to get piled on.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

Ok no worries to everyone. I really enjoy this site and there are NO ISSUES. If I really felt that the mods were bad or I didn't like them I simply would not come to this web site anymore. I was just simply saying at times I think you guys gang up and bully, this is my PERCEPTION.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

Cat scratch fever! Duh duh duh! Cat scratch fever! Duh duh duh duh!:headbange

Oh, wait... something has gone very wrong with this thread. What about the Nuge?

(Backs away slowly....)

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=cpayne5;442508]Exactly. It will teach them to hide it.

If a dog pees in the house, it's not the dog's fault. You have to take the dog outside and wait (however long it takes!) for the dog to go. When the dog goes, you praise him - a treat usually works best:). It will learn that by going outside, it is doing what you want. If you smack it for peeing inside, it will say "crap, I better stop peeing when he's around".[/quote]
Well your dog might say "crap, I better stop peeing when he's around" but when I walk my dog like you suggested he say's "look at this dumb fool I can stay out as long as I want if I just don't pee and I can check out the entire back yard. These humans are so dumb and easy to train".

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=cpayne5;442508]Exactly. It will teach them to hide it.

If a dog pees in the house, it's not the dog's fault. You have to take the dog outside and wait (however long it takes!) for the dog to go. When the dog goes, you praise him - a treat usually works best:). It will learn that by going outside, it is doing what you want. If you smack it for peeing inside, it will say "crap, I better stop peeing when he's around".[/QUOTE]

I disagree.
I will also follow them outside in the morning / evening and praise them when they do pee or poo to reaffirm they are in the right area. (of course I don't need to anymore cause they know where to do it)
Whatever works for you is what works for you. My method works for me, and it works extremely fast. I have very obediant dogs and they are a ton of fun. They are like my little children and have tons of personality. I guess my dogs were smart enough to realize to pee outside right away. They never hid it.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

Surprising decision on Capital Hill

[url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080626/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_guns]Supreme Court says Americans have right to guns - Yahoo! News[/url]

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Hog1;454272]Surprising decision on Capital Hill

[url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080626/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_guns]Supreme Court says Americans have right to guns - Yahoo! News[/url][/QUOTE]

It's not terribly surprising given the current makeup of the court. I don't like the result, but, after reading the lower court's decision, it may be the right one.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;454273]It's not terribly surprising given the current makeup of the court. I don't like the result, but, after reading the lower court's decision, it may be the right one.[/QUOTE]

You don't like the idea that individuals have the right to own firearms?

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

State rights go out the window when it comes to guns but when it comes to abortion and gay marriage it's god's gift to mankind.

Scalia and crew strike again.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=saden1;454342]State rights go out the window when it comes to guns but when it comes to abortion and gay marriage it's god's gift to mankind.

Scalia and crew strike again.[/QUOTE]

Well, the 14th amendment incorporated the Bill of Rights to apply to the states. So technically, the idea of "states rights" were thrown out the window around April of 1861.

Personally, I prefer the idea that the states cannot abridge our freedom of religion, freedom to assemble, our freedom to own firearms, and so on. Call me crazy, but the Bill of Rights, and forcing government at the local, state, and federal levels to abide by them seems like a pretty good idea.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

I liked the interviews of the mayors of cities that ban guns talking about how it will increase crime. The funny part is those cities allready have the highest crime rates and it seems the bad guys allready have guns.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=firstdown;454376]I liked the interviews of the mayors of cities that ban guns talking about how it will increase crime. The funny part is those cities allready have the highest crime rates and it seems the bad guys allready have guns.[/quote]

It DOES make it difficult to prove the point, does it not?
Like D.C. is and has generally been the murder capital of the US, and has had the strickest guns laws during that same time.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=Hog1;454379]It DOES make it difficult to prove the point, does it not?
Like D.C. is and has generally been the murder capital of the US, and has had the strickest guns laws during that same time.[/quote]
It does and this is not giving people the right just to go out and buy all the guns they want it just says people have the right to own a gun. I'm sure DC will have strict laws on the purchasing of guns and may even limit the number people can buy. It will be interesting how this works itself out over the next couple of months. I as a non gun owner believe they made the correct ruling.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

I don't see how anybody could say they made the wrong ruling. It says it right in the second amendment that the people have the right to bear arms.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

What militia do you belong to? And are you well regulated?

I guess "activist judges" applies only to liberal judges.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

It also states "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". Its does not say that to bear the arms you have to be a well regulated militla. With those comas it breaks it up into different groups.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=firstdown;454427]A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

It also states "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". Its does not say that to bear the arms you have to be a well regulated militla. With those comas it breaks it up into different groups.[/QUOTE]

What does "arms" mean? We seem to have arbitrarily determined that "arms" includes handguns, but not M-60s, RPGs, tanks, etc.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;454372]Well, the 14th amendment incorporated the Bill of Rights to apply to the states. So technically, the idea of "states rights" were thrown out the window around April of 1861.

Personally, I prefer the idea that the states cannot abridge our freedom of religion, freedom to assemble, our freedom to own firearms, and so on. Call me crazy, but the Bill of Rights, and forcing government at the local, state, and federal levels to abide by them seems like a pretty good idea.[/QUOTE]

It's not so simple. In interpreting the scope of the various rights conferred by the Bill of Rights (not in determining whether they even apply), the more conservative justices tend to defer to the states' "reasonable" restrictions on individual liberties. For example, conservative justices tend to grant the states broad rights to impose restrictions on free speech (e.g., porn). They just subscribe to a different philosophy when passing judgment on 2nd Amendment issues.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=firstdown;454427]A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

It also states "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". Its does not say that to bear the arms you have to be a well regulated militla. With those comas it breaks it up into different groups.[/quote]
Agreed, and in light of the Framers breaking away from an oppresive government, I think their intent was pretty clear to allow "the people" to keep arms so that a new government would be less likely to become oppressive. The mention to the "well regulated militia" was intented to provide the Constitutional right to each state to have its own "militia" so that the federal government would be less likely to use military force against a state. The Framers intent was for the federal government to have FAR less control than it does today.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[quote=saden1;454342]State rights go out the window when it comes to guns but when it comes to abortion and gay marriage it's god's gift to mankind.

Scalia and crew strike again.[/quote]
Not allowing gun ownership is a direct violation of the 2nd Ammendment. There is no constitutional right to abortion or gay marriage. The "right" to an abortion was based on the Roe v. Wade ruling, not by any legislation.

I'm all for states rights concerning abortion and gay marriage. If the people of a state want abortion and gay marriage, and it is voted into law, so be it. If other states don't want abortion and don't want gay marriage, so be it. The Supreme Court should only get involved in disputes between states, it should not be "legislating morality" one way or the other.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=saden1;454416]What militia do you belong to? And are you well regulated?

I guess "activist judges" applies only to liberal judges.[/QUOTE]

The "militia" was made up of citizens. "Well regulated" meant that you knew how to use a gun.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

It's all about how you choose to interpret the constitution.

[QUOTE][I]A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.[/I][/QUOTE]

Segments of the above quote are not disjoint otherwise they would be on separate line. The founders are people who mastered the English language after all. The "right of the people to keep and bear arms" portion would be nonsensical without the first part of the sentence.

The constitution doesn't say following which is how [B]you interpret[/B] the constitution:

1. The Congress shall permit the formation of a militia.
3. The Congress shall be responsible for regulating militias.
2. The Congress shall not infringe on the peoples right to bear arms.


As for gay marriage and abortion, that's easy one. Clearly the 1'st and the 14th amendments are [B]interpreted[/B] by you differently. When you think of it abortion and gay marriage are after all morally reprehensible because of religious dogma.

[QUOTE][I]Congress shall [B]make no law respecting an establishment of religion[/B], or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[/I][/QUOTE]


[QUOTE][I]All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall [B]abridge[/B] the [B]privileges[/B] or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State [B]deprive[/B] any person of [B]life,[/B] [B]liberty,[/B] or property, without due process of law; nor [B]deny[/B] to any person within its jurisdiction the [B]equal protection of the laws[/B].[/I][/QUOTE]

It's all about interpretation though that dip shit Scallia will have you believe his interpretation is better than everyone else's.

Re: Ted Nugent on Gun Control
 

[QUOTE=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;454457]What does "arms" mean? We seem to have arbitrarily determined that "arms" includes handguns, but not M-60s, RPGs, tanks, etc.[/QUOTE]

Yes, "arms" means guns. There is little doubt to any rational person that the founders intended for the citizens to have the ability to kill government soldiers if the government got out of hand.

Knowing what they had to go through in order to separate from the king, is anyone here actually trying to argue that Madison wanted to make it [I]more difficult[/I] for the citizens to overthrow another tyrant should they ever gain control of the government?