Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-03-2012, 23:31   #1
OlliesRevenge
Senior Member
 
OlliesRevenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: WA
Posts: 578
RussP: I added these first posts, 1-7, to this thread because:
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlliesRevenge View Post
I appreciate your thoughts here Sam. I have learned something, and I thank you for that.

It looks like I discovered the rules here at Glock Talk... I'm debating civil rights issues with (mostly) police officers, in a forum controlled by...police officers. I guess I shouldn't be surprised when half my debate vanishes.

It's been 26 years since my father drew his last breath, but I can hear him chuckling about this one as clear as if he was sitting across the table from me... he didn't raise a fool.

Good night gentlemen.
*******************************************


I'm a career firefighter for a Big "West Coast 7" City up here in the NorthWest, and I work in the south "culturally diverse" side of that city... so I get to see you guys and gals in blue on alot of the same runs (I've pulled many taser darts out of your "customers"). I have seen the kind of people you have to deal with... Basically I "get it", just judging from the photo, I'm not inviting Christopher Proescher to my back yard BBQ either.

What I don't get is why these OC confrontations always wind up in a @!$$!#& contest to get the OCer to show ID.

I don't personally OC, but I have several friends who do (one of whom has actually had one of these "Papers Please" encounters). With minor variations, it's always the same story -

  • · Nervous Nellie citizen calls 911 to report OC'er
  • · Cop shows up, knows OC is perfectly legal but wants to see ID - "To ensure the scene is safe" (like that will prove anything).
  • · OC'er just happens to be a Ron Paul libertarian who knows his rights (go figure!). He says something like : "Given the fact that I'm not driving, and am not required to carry my Drivers License when I'm a pedestrian, what kind of ID would you like to see officer?"
  • · Situation either escalates into an arrest for some creative infraction ('cause the initial reason for contact - OC, is legal) OR either OC'er or cop capitulates.
The basic point is that the OC'er isn't breaking the law, so I'll just ask; "Why the need to ID?...What will it prove?" I don't want to get into a big discussion about social psychology and the need to establish Alpha dominance, so I'll circumvent that issue and simply ask - Wouldn't it be pretty easy to articulate the rationale for complete inaction in this case?

You arrive on scene to investigate an OC complaint and witness an adult male carrying an expensive firearm in a quality holster openly on his belt... he's clearly not a "banger", or a 220 nutjob. He's just "That Guy", the passionate gun enthusiast making his statement (one I know drives a minivan... sheesh). If we input the details of this scenario into the critical thinking - Street Smart section of our grey matter, the output would clearly be..... 'This Person Is Not a Threat'... and as an added bonus they weren't even breaking the law in the 1st place! They could win the prize of NOT even being contacted by Law Enforcement today!

Feel free to stop by the station and use the restroom, just don't raid the fridge!

My .02

Last edited by RussP; 05-11-2012 at 05:55..
OlliesRevenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 23:45   #2
OlliesRevenge
Senior Member
 
OlliesRevenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: WA
Posts: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotpig View Post
Very simple, the cop is now responsible for this guys actions. If they fail to check him out and he walks across the street to McDonald's and shoots half a dozen customers it will become the Police Officers fault.
I've heard this argument, and I don't buy it. The responding officers arrive, do not observe any unlawful behavior, thus no need to demand ID. If they want to cover themselves, they can document their actions and whatever conversation takes place (that's what documentation is for - I do it all the time). I propose that ID'ing someone has little to no utility in determining if they are planning a one man 'active shooter' event, it is simply a "compliance test" - I could name off a laundry list of shooters that had no record that would have gotten them arrested prior to their event had LE had the chance to make contact before the shooting (Loughner & the Army officer are recent examples...).

This is a great thread, alot of good legal debate, but let's not forget to try to put the pieces together of how it goes down on the street. I know how the conversation goes, cause I have witnessed stuff like this...

Security Guard: "This guy's unreal, I approach and ask him why in the name of Tebow he's carrying a gun in the park... and he goes cow$#!* on me, telling me I'm just a rent-a -cop, etc"
Cop: "That's rough man, well go have a chat with this jack hole and see if he wants to talk himself into going to jail... Sir can I see some ID..."

... and he's off to the races, doing the most he can get away with, rather than the minimum necessary to get the job done.

For the record - I'm not arguing that no contact should be made. I'm arguing that ID should not be part of the equation in cases like this, cause it makes no sense.

There is a big wrinkle in the law with the ID'ing of a pedestrian. There is a reason "ID" is requested of a pedestrian as opposed to "drivers license". DL makes no sense here, but that is what the cop wants to see, and that is what most people will reflexively produce. In my state (outside of a traffic stop) you must only "identify yourself" during a detainment, but during an arrest cops may use force to procure a physical ID. During the detainment you can simply state your name and you've complied with the law (unfortunately opinions and understanding vary widely from cop to cop on this - I know 'cause I have talked to alot of you guys around the beanery table). That's why the arrest in these cases is never for "failure to show ID"... it's always some tangential result of creative thinking.

I propose that a Police Officer who does "creative thinking" to come up with a reason for arrest simply because someone takes a stand for their rights on the ID issue is just as belligerent (arguably more so) as the person being arrested.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hotpig View Post
I do not have any sympathy for a person who makes what should have been a nothing and ends up forcing po po to arrest him so that he can file a suit. This type of person is nothing but a thief.

Same level as the fall down artist...
I don't know Georgia law, but I don't think LE is required to arrest in a case like this. The word "forced" simply isn't applicable here. And I guarantee this guy isn't motivated by money... absolutely guarantee it! Think about it! If anything this guy tunes into Alex Jones...

From one humble civil servant to another, I think the "Papers Please" protocol is nothing but a liability and a PR bomb for the city.

Bottom line: what is it about encountering an armed man that should seem unusual or alarming, here in the land of the free and the home of the brave?

Regards,

OR
__________________
Good men must not obey the laws too well.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it.
~Henry David Thoreau

Remember always: The government is not the country!
OlliesRevenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2012, 11:07   #3
OlliesRevenge
Senior Member
 
OlliesRevenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: WA
Posts: 578
Quote:
However please be aware that there is a substntial group of people out there who regularly refuse to identify themselves to us... That group is of course regular criminals. ...sometimes when people act almost just like members of a group they get confused with being a member of that group.
I hear you. I have no LE experience (I just get to see LEO's do their thing alot), but logic tells me that criminal's won't want the attention that OC'ing would bring. I'd be surprised if any LEO reading this could relate a story of an OC'er who also had a warrant, etc.

It all boils down to street sense & threat recognition doesn't it? Clothing, hygiene, body language, how they articulate themselves in conversation; it all paints a picture. Every experienced LEO reading this knows what I am talking about. Through experience, observation, and intuition, you can tell the difference between a "scroat" and an activist libertarian OC'er within seconds of meeting them. The same way I can differentiate between a "sick" & "not-sick" patient on an aid call as soon as I'm through the door. And let's be honest, any LEO who cannot do this should probably find a different line of work.

Quote:
And at where you are are there really alot of people who are openly carrying a gun or is it a bit unusual, in a statistical sense?
I concede it is unusual, albeit perfectly legal.

Take care Bruce
__________________
Good men must not obey the laws too well.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it.
~Henry David Thoreau

Remember always: The government is not the country!
OlliesRevenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-06-2012, 18:55   #4
OlliesRevenge
Senior Member
 
OlliesRevenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: WA
Posts: 578
Quote:
Here are two people who may have blurred the line between "scroat" and activist libertarian open carrier:
Touche' Bruce.

My experience with OC'ers has been influenced by those I know personally; Well dressed professional people who just happen to be dedicated 2A advocates. I have no idea how well my personal impression of OC'ers reflects what is happening, on average, nationally. I hope these two examples do not represent the norm.

I'm gonna head back to General Glocking and just break out the popcorn for this thread... thanks for the replies.
__________________
Good men must not obey the laws too well.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it.
~Henry David Thoreau

Remember always: The government is not the country!
OlliesRevenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2012, 12:06   #5
OlliesRevenge
Senior Member
 
OlliesRevenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: WA
Posts: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bren View Post
I have never...NEVER,,,seen a "well dressed professional" who was either an OC activist or OCIng for any reason.

I find your claim very hard to believe.

The most recent OCers I have seen - in about 2010 there was a biker at the parts counter...
Well, I tried to bow out of the discussion, in part 'cause I'm starting to notice posts go missing that I didn't think were inflammatory, and thus something is happening at the Mod level that I don't understand. But I felt compelled to come back since my honesty has been questioned.

I'm not sure why my statement would be hard to believe. I'm a firefighter, competition shooter, CCW'er, father, and a fairly well groomed square lookin' dude. It stands to reason that I associate with similar folks...

Quote:
My experience with OC'ers has been influenced by those I know personally
... in fact, one of the OC'ers that I know is doing well in the entrance process for a major county sherriff's office up NW where I live. This young man is educated, well dressed, articulate, and is the epitome of a "good ambassador" for the OC cause.

May I suggest that your opinion is tainted by the fact that, as someone who litigates these kinds of cases, you have been exposed mostly to the 'lowest common denominator'?


We all have indivduals within our respective groups that we wish were not representing us. Up here in the NW, if I run across "bikers" they are more likely to be Microsoft employees playing bad boy dress up than actual "scroat's" or true 1%'ers. And let's be honest, we know plenty of Cops and FF'ers who like to play the same dress up game on their day off.

As far as blurring the line between "scroat" and activist libertarian OC'er - I can come up with many more examples that blur (or worse) the line within any group. I know of a firefighter currently incarcerated for child pornography, and I could come up with bad LE examples all day long.

Here's one- Ohio Cop threatens to execute concealed carrier.

I can think of five more New Orleans PD guys currently in jail for gunning down an unarmed family on the Danziger Bridge...
__________________
Good men must not obey the laws too well.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it.
~Henry David Thoreau

Remember always: The government is not the country!
OlliesRevenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2012, 23:50   #6
OlliesRevenge
Senior Member
 
OlliesRevenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: WA
Posts: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by RustyS View Post
The reason a Cop wants ID is to run you for outstanding warrants.
Uh... yeah, I'm aware of that.

This debate just got flogged in over 300 posts to date. Knowledgeable people on both sides made some very lucid arguments... and you felt the need to add this? Sorry if I sound like a jerk, but based solely on what you wrote here I cannot even tell which side you are on.
__________________
Good men must not obey the laws too well.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it.
~Henry David Thoreau

Remember always: The government is not the country!
OlliesRevenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 00:15   #7
OlliesRevenge
Senior Member
 
OlliesRevenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: WA
Posts: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuneyBooney View Post
I fully agree. ...It makes sense to check people for warrants even if it is intrusive.
ID checks and searches in the absense of RAS? It doesn't make sense in this country. I'll take freedom over safety... safety is just an illusion anyway.
__________________
Good men must not obey the laws too well.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it.
~Henry David Thoreau

Remember always: The government is not the country!
OlliesRevenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 12:07   #8
OlliesRevenge
Senior Member
 
OlliesRevenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: WA
Posts: 578
OC = legal; legal <> RAS; therefore OC <> RAS; ...

RussP: I moved these posts to their own thread from the "Man files suit over (OC) arrest in Gwinnett park" thread since the OP wants a general discussion not specifically related to the Gwinnett park incident.
*******************************************


I suppose there is nothing wrong with participating in a debate like this w/ academic interest only. From the standpoint of the guy in jail however, it certainly is more practical to think in terms of those who support your arrest, and those who do not.

I think the difference has to quantified further than that though, and can be expressed in 'math like' terms. My thought process is as follows:

OC = legal
legal <> RAS
therefore OC <> RAS
RAS is necessary for a Terry stop, therefore:
OC <> Terry stop

The primary divide, as I see it, between those who support the arrest and those who do not, rests within step 2. Can legal activity equal RAS? IMO, the answer is a firm "No". RAS is required to be more than a "hunch". It must be a combination of articulable facts. I personally don't buy the "totality of the circumstances" (TOS) argument, because if you distill that argument down, TOS essentially winds up needing to be based on articulable facts... so then we are in the loop of circular reasoning.

I only know the basics. I don't have the experience with "Shepardizing" case law like some of more knowledge members here have, I simply operate under the philosophical notion that; "The law should serve the people, the people should not serve the law"



"The law is a convenience created to let man live in a reasonable society. To venerate it simply because it exists is nonsense" ~ Jeff Cooper
__________________
Good men must not obey the laws too well.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it.
~Henry David Thoreau

Remember always: The government is not the country!

Last edited by RussP; 05-10-2012 at 14:21..
OlliesRevenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 12:12   #9
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 44,527
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlliesRevenge View Post
I suppose there is nothing wrong with participating in a debate like this w/ academic interest only. From the standpoint of the guy in jail however, it certainly is more practical to think in terms of those who support your arrest, and those who do not.

I think the difference has to quantified further than that though, and can be expressed in 'math like' terms. My thought process is as follows:

OC = legal
legal <> RAS
therefore OC <> RAS
RAS is necessary for a Terry stop, therefore:
OC <> Terry stop

The primary divide, as I see it, between those who support the arrest and those who do not, rests within step 2. Can legal activity equal RAS? IMO, the answer is a firm "No". RAS is required to be more than a "hunch". It must be a combination of articulable facts. I personally don't buy the "totality of the circumstances" (TOS) argument, because if you distill that argument down, TOS essentially winds up needing to be based on articulable facts... so then we are in the loop of circular reasoning.

I only know the basics. I don't have the experience with "Shepardizing" case law like some of more knowledge members here have, I simply operate under the philosophical notion that; "The law should serve the people, the people should not serve the law"



"The law is a convenience created to let man live in a reasonable society. To venerate it simply because it exists is nonsense" ~ Jeff Cooper
I'm curious, what does that have to do with an arrest for trespassing?

In any information that's been released, where does it say the RAS by the police for the arrest was OC?

The open carry was noted by the security guard in the 911 call.
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 12:46   #10
OlliesRevenge
Senior Member
 
OlliesRevenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: WA
Posts: 578
Quote:
Originally Posted by RussP View Post
I'm curious, what does that have to do with an arrest for trespassing?

In any information that's been released, where does it say the RAS by the police for the arrest was OC?

The open carry was noted by the security guard in the 911 call.
I only read the Gwinnett Park information once, because I am more interested in the general scope of this debate rather than the specifics of this case.

That said, In my understanding, OC'er was in the process of walking out of the park when contacted by LE. OC'er asked; "Am I being detained?"... and in the absence of RAS, the answer should have been; "No, you are free to go" - End of Story

The arrest for CT occurred 50 + min into the Terry stop IIRC.

This has all been fleshed out in this thread.

For the record, I am not "anti-cop". I get along well with the cop's that work in my district. I do understand the desire to get scrappy with regard to protecting civil rights though, & if more people did this I think it would make our country a better place, and our cops better civil servants.
__________________
Good men must not obey the laws too well.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it.
~Henry David Thoreau

Remember always: The government is not the country!

Last edited by OlliesRevenge; 05-10-2012 at 12:50..
OlliesRevenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 13:00   #11
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlliesRevenge View Post
That said, In my understanding, OC'er was in the process of walking out of the park when contacted by LE. OC'er asked; "Am I being detained?"... and in the absence of RAS, the answer should have been; "No, you are free to go" - End of Story
You forget the call that got them there in the first place.

"Yes, you're being detained while I sort out this 911 call about you."
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle
Sam Spade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 19:27   #12
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 21,210
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlliesRevenge View Post
Can legal activity equal RAS? IMO, the answer is a firm "No". RAS is required to be more than a "hunch". It must be a combination of articulable facts.
Next, let me address this. Your latter statement is correct, but your view on legal activity being "off limits" in developing RAS is totally wrong. In fact, RAS is *exactly* a legal or series of legal acts that leads an officer to believe that crime is afoot. If he could articulate illegal acts, it wouldn't be RS, it would be probable cause---he's actually just witnessed a crime.

Two examples, mine and someone else's

So there I am at 0-dark-hundred, patrolling an otherwise vacant street. I see some guy looking up and down the street near a jewelry store. He's wearing socks on his hands. Not a thing that I described is in any way illegal, yet I stopped and detained him for investigation. And I was right.

The other example: officer noticed the Petitioner talking with another individual on a street corner while repeatedly walking up and down the same street. The men would periodically peer into a store window and then talk some more. The men also spoke to a third man whom they eventually followed up the street. The officer believed that the Petitioner and the other men were “casing” a store for a potential robbery. The officer decided to approach the men for questioning, and given the nature of the behavior the officer decided to perform a quick search of the men before questioning. A quick frisking of the Petitioner produced a concealed weapon and the Petitioner was charged with carrying a concealed weapon.

Again, nothing illegal about window shopping, or talking to your friends, or walking up and down the same street. Yet Mr. Terry (if you didn't recognize the story) was rightfully stopped, and the evidence collected was used to convict him---but he was never charged with attempted robbery.
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle
Sam Spade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 22:14   #13
OlliesRevenge
Senior Member
 
OlliesRevenge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: WA
Posts: 578
I appreciate your thoughts here Sam. I have learned something, and I thank you for that.

It looks like I discovered the rules here at Glock Talk... I'm debating civil rights issues with (mostly) police officers, in a forum controlled by...police officers. I guess I shouldn't be surprised when half my debate vanishes.

It's been 26 years since my father drew his last breath, but I can hear him chuckling about this one as clear as if he was sitting across the table from me... he didn't raise a fool.

Good night gentlemen.
__________________
Good men must not obey the laws too well.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson

Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it.
~Henry David Thoreau

Remember always: The government is not the country!
OlliesRevenge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 22:57   #14
TBO
CLM Number 122
Why so serious?
 
TBO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NRA Life Member
Posts: 45,653
Blog Entries: 1


You've been given your very own thread (in order not to sidetrack the original thread/topic).
__________________
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."

"If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters".

"A person who won't reason has no advantage over one who can't reason."

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."

“Ignorance is a lot like alcohol: the more you have of it, the less you are able to see its effect on you.”


Originally Posted by Rooster Rugburn:
Didn't the whole sheepdog thing actually start right here on Glock Talk? A bunch of wannabees bought a bunch of T-shirts and took an oath to defend those who won't defend themselves?
TBO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2012, 06:22   #15
RussP
Moderator
 
RussP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 44,527
Blog Entries: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlliesRevenge View Post
I appreciate your thoughts here Sam. I have learned something, and I thank you for that.

It looks like I discovered the rules here at Glock Talk... I'm debating civil rights issues with (mostly) police officers, in a forum controlled by...police officers. I guess I shouldn't be surprised when half my debate vanishes.

It's been 26 years since my father drew his last breath, but I can hear him chuckling about this one as clear as if he was sitting across the table from me... he didn't raise a fool.

Good night gentlemen.
Actually, sir, it did not vanish. Let me explain to you and others new to GT and Carry Issues.

The parts directly relevant to the original thread remained there.

However, when you stated you wanted a broader discussion, a more general discussion...
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlliesRevenge View Post
I only read the Gwinnett Park information once, because I am more interested in the general scope of this debate rather than the specifics of this case.
...so as not to derail "Man files suit over (OC) arrest in Gwinnett park", as TBO advised you, you were given your own thread, your own venue to continue that discussion.

Now, since you felt there exists some conspiracy against you because only a portion of your posts were brought into the new thread, voilà - they are all here now.

Now, you've stated above, "I'm debating civil rights issues with (mostly) police officers, in a forum controlled by...police officers." Well, no police officers control any public forum here on GT. That is done solely by Eric and his staff.

And civil rights discussions really belong in Civil Liberties Issues Forum. However, since your formula for the discussion is,
Quote:
Originally Posted by OlliesRevenge View Post
Quote:
OC = legal
legal <> RAS
therefore OC <> RAS
RAS is necessary for a Terry stop, therefore:
OC <> Terry stop
about OC, it will stay here in Carry Issues.

This will give an opportunity to both LE and non-LE members to contribute.
__________________
Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

"Comment is free, but facts are sacred." C.P. Scott, 1921
RussP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 09:11   #16
stillbill
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 78
If a LEO would like the name of a person, why not introduce their self to this person.

Officer "Hi, I am officer <name>", then wait for a reply.
Could get a response of "Hi, I am Mr. <name>"

The biggest thing is the approach. Be polite and professional.

On the other side, if a LEO approaches and demands ID. How will they respond to "Give me our name, and I'll give you mine."?
stillbill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 10:05   #17
Drain You
NRA member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,832
I was told there would be no math.
Drain You is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 11:04   #18
Misty02
Senior Member
 
Misty02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,980
I’ve enjoyed reading through this thread and your comments, OlliesRevenge. I find the topic of discussion interesting and often read through the OC threads.

Learning a thing or two from Sam will become the norm, rather than the exception. Give it time and you’ll see.


.
__________________


"In making tactical dispositions, the highest pitch you can attain is to conceal them." - Sun Tzu

Outpost Member #69
Misty02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 11:05   #19
Misty02
Senior Member
 
Misty02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drain You View Post
I was told there would be no math.
I read over that part quickly too, just in case.

.
__________________


"In making tactical dispositions, the highest pitch you can attain is to conceal them." - Sun Tzu

Outpost Member #69
Misty02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2012, 11:17   #20
DScottHewitt
EMT-B
 
DScottHewitt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Waynesboro, VA
Posts: 29,252
Send a message via AIM to DScottHewitt Send a message via Yahoo to DScottHewitt
I got lost just trying to figure out the danged thread title.....
__________________
Dear Lord, Thank You for guiding me straight and true through the many obstacles in my path. Thank You for any good that I may have done, I'm so sorry about the bad.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
DScottHewitt is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 23:10.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 897
216 Members
681 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31