n23x

I agree with it being shades of grey, and also agree that it's few and far between that we find a product that is totally "made in America". I don't like the phrase, "buy American", as its main purpose seems to be to invoke commercial patriotism. I prefer "buy local". Is there a local shop that might do the same thing that a bulk supplier can do? Preference, then, to the local guy. That being said, money and performance matters. If I get a significant increase in savings, performance, or vendor interaction, those can always tip the scales. .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

No, that is not what I'm saying. I am suggesting that, without being there, it's tough to comment on the actual conflict and escalation. I am also saying that I've met a significant number of U.S. soldiers who "are not exactly PC and are not good examples of friendly diplomacy". Does that mean most or all of them behave like this? Absolutely not. Does it make me leary when I hear a story like, "I was just drinking water, and I got shot!"? Absolutely. I'm not condoning the soldier being shot, or any of your above examples. I am simply responding to the posters whose responses seem to have the attitude that the US soldiers can do no wrong in foreign countries, and even if they do, they think "fuck those guys in those foreign countries". .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

You are so fucking ridiculous, it is retarded. You literally have nothing to contribute, and all you can do is attempt to stifle others with threats. I said it before, and I'll say it again: I have seen multiple vets harass someone for fasting, even after they were reprimanded. Does that mean that most/all vets act that way? Certainly not. It does, however, mean that some act that way. Nobody deserved to be shot, but to assume that the soldier did nothing to provoke the incident is foolish at best. .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

Such as? That's quite the blanket statement to throw around. .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

Thinking back to a prior employment, I can recall multiple occasions of 'friendly christian' Americans aggressively hassling a fellow employee while he was fasting. Now here's the fun part: Want to guess how many of those guys were vets? .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

holy christ, no. "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

Ah, but the donor ('father', if you'd prefer) has every right to exercise his position by NOT having sex. I (and many others) might argue that the decision to engage in sexual intercourse is of pretty significant value. What do you mean here? Sure there was. Sex! .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

A previous, terribly wise boss (and mentor to me) once told me, "if you do things more than twice, automate it". Unless I've been suffering deja vu, I hope you have a macro so you can just hit a hotkey and it generates that post. .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

You don't use computers much, do you? It is quite easy to find torrents of pretty much every new movie, almost all of which are video taped copies from the theatre. Whether that happens by people sitting in the theatre, or the projectionist in the booth is another debate. .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

Nobody wants to try because nobody wants to hear you complain constantly about how "some young whippersnapper broke your hip" when you guys were rolling around in the grass. .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

I think that if they cop was not in uniform, being joe-civilian, I'd agree. The cop, operating as a cop, is a professional, with significant powers and trust granted to them over common civilians. If they abuse their power in that role, they deserve a greater punishment for abusing that role of trust. I think I'd equate this as: civilian assaults a civilian -> punishment should be x cop assaults a civilian -> punishment should be x (as before) + y (which is the punishment for abusing their role of power and trust) Disagree? .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

I wonder if LEOs have protocol to prevent just such an action? Perhaps one that doesn't involve kicking someone in the mouth? No, you're right. Certainly not. .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

There is pretty clear video of the suspect in a passive position, with hands FAR away from the body. He was going to shoot the cop with the gun he had hidden in his mouth? Oh, it was probably a knife, you're right. So, escalated violence on passive suspects is ok as long they're non-lethal? (The answer is: "It's not OK, regardless.") From the video, I can clearly see that the perp's hands are widespread, with his chest on the ground. That is what I would consider a passive stance. The cop is obviously not concerned about the perp's hands going for a weapon, because the perp's hands go closer to his body (and closer to a weapon, if he had one on himself) after the cop kicks him in the mouth. The cop wasn't worried about getting shot, or stabbed. He was pissed off, and decided to exact some "justice" before locking the guy up. Additionally, saying that a kick to the mouth is justified if the guy said "come any closer and I'll kill you" is retarded, because the cop just ran up and kicked him in the mouth. Notice a lack of verbal exchange (or time for one)? I did. Trust me, the guy is a moron for running from the cops, and he deserves to be punished. But that isn't the cop's job. .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

I'm going to disagree with you here. Kicking a person in the mouth when they are clearly on the ground with their hands spread served no purpose for the officer, other than to get out some aggression that he had towards the perp. That's not the role the officer plays. Punishment is for the court to decide. If the officer cannot control his behavior, even in the "heat of the moment", he cannot be a competent officer. Running from the cops? Dumb. Car chase? Dumb. Kicking an unarmed man who is in a passive position? Dumb. .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC

Indeed! .jim "Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC