Doesn't have to be "scholarly" in order to be accurate. I presume by your post you didn't bother to look. Your loss.

The rest of the post you're responding to was not aimed at you, I was answering the OP and the darn near 12 pages of folks complaining because he asked the question. I suppose I could have broken it up into two or three posts so there would be no confusion, but supposed most folks could figure it out. Critical reading.

Bill

BTW: No need to compare educations. I've met some pretty stupid, highly degreed individuals in my life, and some very wise folks who never saw the inside of a classroom.

 

Amen to that...

 

Fair enough, I wondered about the second half. I am not familiar with the term OP. Thank you for making me think about it, and deciding the meaning of OP: original poster.
Just a side note I understand the nation is a republic. However, republics exist in many different forms. A republic is really only a representative government, with or without equal representation of the citizens(former USSR). Where a democracy has equal participation in government by all citizens(Athens). We really have neither, and we have both. The two systems of government are not a dichotomy(either or). We have a hybrid form of the two types of government. We have representatives who are elected by the people, not a select few. Therefore, all citizens are capable of participating in government through representation, which means we have a democratic republic. That is what I was attempting to say.
As far as education goes I was not attempting to say someone without an education are ignorant. You stated I could get an education for looking at a bias website. I was explaining to you, in particular, I had an education and did not need anymore from a bias website.

 

"someone without an education ARE ignorant"
"an education FOR looking at"
and my favorite: "I HAD (you had one and then lost it?) an education"

I usually seek a refund when I have been shortchanged.

 

Man I did not pull your chain. Read the complete sentence when you are quoting. "For" was the wrong word, I should of proff-read my post. I "have" a habit of writing in the past tense. I do not always catch myself when I am having an informal discussion. However, introducing grammar is a logical fallacy or a red herring.

I am sorry if I offended you, when you decided to be the "White Knight" for everyone else. I am also sorry if I offended you when I corrected your view of government. I find importance in completely understanding a unit of measure when relifing an institution. It is fine with me if you do not. We can both sit around, and commit logical fallacies to prove our point. I do not completely understand what your point is, other than to insult me. If you wish to continue your quest go ahead. It is Friday afternoon and I am ready for a beer. I will would rather call it good debate and not an argument. Since I have insulted you one last time, you can feel free to to return the favor.
I can understand why you pointed out the word "republic" in the Constitution. I also understand, why Americans view our system of government as the correct system, thus, we currently define republic as our form of government. I was merely saying, there are many different forms of republics. Personally, I believe, and I may not be correct, our nation is a unique form of a republic. I also believe, our uniqueness has made the US the greatest nation in the world. Therefore, it is wrong to merely refer to our system as a republic.

From your first post in the thread you have intended to insult me, and I returned the favor. You have jumped on everything regardless, if it was in response to you or not. Twice now I have attempted to call it even. Why don't you just let it go. I have admitted I am not always correct. I have also acknowledge you are not incorrect. Could you tell me why you have an issue with me?

My original point was, police officers are part of the system and do not function outside the system. Laws restrict freedom and the police are the part of the system people interact with directly. Therefore, people feel the police are restricting their freedom. It can only be an asset to an individual police officer to understand why people dislike them. For a police officer to jump in by saying, we are only enforcing the laws, is wrong. They are part of a bigger system and need to realize people are not looking at them as an individual, they see the system. If a police officer uses this knowledge they can enforce our laws, protect the public, and be an asset in their community. Therefore, I was not criticizing the police. I was just saying why people dislike them. The one who jumped in and said I was wrong, did not understand what I was saying because he has a predisposition. It was pointless to explain it to him because his values would not of allowed him to see my point. Thus, yes it was over his head.

I think I have now completely explained all of my points in a very civil fashion. If I have made a mechanical or usage error, feel free to insult me, I do not mind.

Travis

 

"Have" is correct.
As for the rest of the missive, I will forgo additional comment. We have both hurled brickbats. I will agree with you it is now time for a beer and that we should just call it a good (spirited?) debate. I mean you no ill will. Maybe we can have a beer and a burger together in Meers someday. At least we both have the good sense to purchase nice rides.

 

Hmmmm you just keep thinkin that, having done both I beg to differ..

 

+++1 and that is coming from someone who is familiar with SS bracelets in my younger days

 

I agree, I think I edited my post after you replied, but it did not change the intent, to call it even. Are you around lawton somewhere?
Travis

 

Ah, peace at last.

I try to ask for a discount on just about anything I purchase, even a night's lodging. What's wrong with trying to save money? Cop, fireman, over the road truck driver, clergyman, undertaker, senior citizen, minor, what difference does it make? Get the discount and spend the savings somewhere else. Businesses that offer discounts are not sacrificing their profit to do it.

Anyone on here refusing to take an HD Forum discount from a sponsor? I didn't think so.

Give the LEOs a break. We are all equal here.