Two injured in New Mexico Wal-Mart shootings

TBO said:
Rich goes out of his way to refer to LEOs or Peace Officers, or Sheriff's Deputies or Police Officers, or State Patrol/Troopers as: "Uniformed Civilians"
Click to expand...
Yup, I do....and now, I think, we get to the crux of any emotionalism in this thread. Why does it upset you? It doesn't seem to upset the other LEO's around here to know that I consider "Them" to be "Us". Do you feel that it demeans your position somehow? If so, how?
Rich
 
Yet again Rich your words, posted by you, and attributed to me by you.
If that's what it takes to make your point, I surmise it's not one worth making.

TBO
 
Ummm-
Your words, TBO, not mine.
Answer the question. It's a simple one. Why are you so insulted by being called a "Uniformed Civilian" or a "Badged Civilian"? I use LEO as often as either of those. Everyone knows the meaning (except, of course, those who would refer to you as "Non-Civilian", of whom I haven 't met many.)

Again, answer the question. It's a simple one.
Rich
 
The point is a person who constantly uses the word and when shown the correct definition, gets bent out of shape and refers to old dictionaries.
Click to expand...

Why is my definition wrong and yours is right? I never saw "This dictionary supersedes all other dictionary's ever printed" in the old or in the new.

So, if your definition is "correct" and it was changed to the latter (older) later, then which would be correct, your old or the new?

Words, other than being the most powerful weapon one can weld, can also be twisted and warped to anything you wish them to be. I'm not bent out of shape, I just say that your definition is wrong, and you can't prove me wrong because each of our definitions come from the same books, the dictionary. I choose to believe the older version, which is more correct than the newer, and you chose the newer version, which is wrong, to me anyway.

Which is right, which is wrong? I say I am right, you say you are right, and we both have books to prove each other's points.

Wayne
 
Answer the question. It's a simple one. Why are you so insulted by being called a "Uniformed Civilian" or a "Badged Civilian". I use LEO as often as either of those.
Click to expand...
Who says I'm insulted? I noticed your preponderance of late using the term Uniformed Civilian to designate LEOs (coincidently as posts got more emotional) and merely pointed out the actual definition to you (assuming you would care to have accurate information regarding words as well as subjects). Seems I was wrong on both counts.

TBO





fwiw: we've had this very discussion before on "civilian". Nothing seems to have changed since then
 
As far as Dictionary definitions, it falls to the most current.
If the definition changes to: a group of people who utter Gaelic phrases then guess what, that is the definition.



to be continued tomorrow if you like, rack time
 
Seems I was wrong on both counts.
Click to expand...
Yes you were, my Brother, my fellow Civilian. See you pointed out a nouveau definition. Others pointed out classical definitions. You explained that "Things change" (ie: your nouveau definition must be correct; after all, it's ummm, "nouveau" :rolleyes: )

Still, there are also certain immutables. Examples:
- The Bill of Rights. Regardless of nouveau interpretation based on "recent events" and "how the world has changed" and "Post 9-11", we all know what the BoR was intended to prevent.

- You are my Brother. You're an American and as a fellow American I will defend your life as you would mine; without looking to see if you are wearing a uniform, badge and pocket protector first....unless, of course, your actions prove you to be someone unworthy of my protection....just as it is with you, I'm certain.

- The fact that non-Military individuals who try to present themselves as a "non-civilian" operators, enforcers or warriors are, well, something a good bit short of all of the above. They insult Real operators, enforcers and warriors who many of us know. They demonstrate a mindset that is neither civilian nor military....simply embarrassing.
Rich
 
As far as Dictionary definitions, it falls to the most current.
Click to expand...

As a purveyor of words, I chose to go to the most correct definition, not what is most current.

That's the reason that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are in so much trouble, the original definition has been changed to what the newer wishes it to be.

LEO's and Firefighters were never meant to become non-civilians. How can a person uphold civil law, if they are not subject to that law? A non-civilian is another class by themselves, held to different laws and to different standards. Those laws and standards used to be more strict then what they seem to be now.

An LEO is a civilian with a badge. They are chosen and given the job of upholding civil law. Not military law, civil law. They are given that power, to not only know civil law, to enforce civil law, but to act within civil law.

Which is one of the biggest complaints now days.

Wayne
 
As far as Dictionary definitions, it falls to the most current.
If the definition changes to: a group of people who utter Gaelic phrases then guess what, that is the definition.
Click to expand...
A Child of the State couldn't have shown more eloquent logic. Orwell couldn't have hoped for a more willing statement on which to base his characters.

Lemme clue you on something, my Brother. Look up the word "pre-vent-at-ive" in the dictionary. It's there, isn't it? Know why? Because the uneducated have been using it for 3 decades. Know what else? Pros in the field laugh at those who use the word publicly...pros continue to use "pre-vent-ive".

It's not enough to have just any "source" sometimes, TBO. Sometimes we have to show a bit of historic comprehension, too. ;)
Rich
 
TheeBadOne said:
Yet again Rich your words, posted by you, and attributed to me by you.
If that's what it takes to make your point, I surmise it's not one worth making.
Click to expand...
Your rebuttals lack substance.

Would you like to stop dancing around "dictionary definitions" and get to the point? Your attitude is rather defensive, and doesn't seem as geared toward clarifying yourself as it is towards picking apart another person's statements. Stop stressing over the definition of a civilian. Start saying what you MEAN to say and get to the underlying issue.
 
And this is why I always use quotes around "civilians". it's irked me since I first heard a LEO refering to non-LEOs that way. I've even been known to call officers on it, asking them what unit they're with. Especially since a friend got sent to the sandbox...

Keep using "civilian" to refer to non-LEO, and widen the "us v. them" gap. Guess what happens when it gets wide enough? And the wrongs on the non-LEO side do NOT excuse wrongs on the LEO side (or vice-versa).
 
TBO, once again, you've moved to stick another brick in the wall.

You sir, like it or not, are a civilian. As are every man-jack here who is not active duty military. THAT sir, is the legal definition of "civilian." Dictionary definitions will not save you in a court of law, where there is an accepted legal definition of a word or phrase. "Civilian" has a legal definition. One that most all of us here know.

You choose to ignore that definition in favor of some transitory non-legal dictionary definition, thereby placing another brick in that wall between "Us" and "Them."

"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that Wall!"

You pride yourself at enforcing the law, yet your pride keeps you from accepting your own position within society. Indeed, it tries to elevate it above the common man from whence it came, and whom you have chosen to serve.

A wise man once said, "The servant is not greater than the master."
 
ci·vil·ian (sĭ-vĭl'yən)

[Middle English, civil law judge, from Old French civilien, from civil, civil, from Latin cīvīlis; see civil.]
noun

1. A person following the pursuits of civil life, especially one who is not an active member of the military or police.
2. A specialist in Roman or civil law.

adjective

Of or relating to civilians or civil life; nonmilitary: civilian clothes; a civilian career.


http://www.ask.com/reference/dictionary/ahdict/24343/civilian

Definition: civilian

Search dictionary for

Source: WordNet (r) 1.7

civilian
adj : associated with or performed by civilians as contrasted with
the military; "civilian clothing" "civilian life" [ant:
military]
n : a nonmilitary citizen [ant: serviceman]


Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)

Civilian \Ci*vil"ian\, n. [From Civil]
1. One skilled in the civil law.

Ancient civilians and writers upon government.
--Swift.

2. A student of the civil law at a university or college.
--R. Graves.

3. One whose pursuits are those of civil life, not military
or clerical.
http://dict.die.net/civilian/
 
*Sighs, and prepares to watch yet another promising thread go down in flames to the pit of closed threads, and all over a word defenition, and by the same combatants*

Really guys, this is getting so stupid and sad it's almost silly.
 
Step back and read this thread with objective eyes. Read my comments (not read into them) and read the others comments.
I offer the below and ask that you consider the difference.
You consider yourself a "Non-Civilian". By you own (choice of) dictionary the "rest" of us are of a different class. We are in the "non-Warrior" class. You, OTOH, are in the class of an Erick Gelhaus: donning your armor daily, to hazard the sudden attacks by hateful enemies on the danger-ridden streets of foreign turf. No one is to be trusted but The Team; All else are suspect....they are "Civilians".
Don't ever again question why mere "civilians" decry the widening gulf....they haven't moved away from you; no, you've moved away from them, representing even the best of them as a Class Apart. They haven't changed since the days of the Constitution; you have.
Enjoy the privileges of your new class....you are Warrior.
Rich
Click to expand...
 
As much as I hate the constant LEO-vs.-Non LEO bickering going on in L&P, I have to say that this argument has significance as it cuts right down to the heart of the matter.

Here, you have someone who takes such great umbrage at the mere mention of a police officer as "them", to the point where every such use of the term "them" is decried as an attempt to foster an us-versus-them attitude on the side of non-badge wearers.

Then, that same poster goes out of his way to take offense at the idea that LEOs and "regular" citizens might share the same category, to the point of ridiculing the notion by posting a picture of a Mall Ninja badge, and by insisting that the dictionary definition of his profession leaves no doubt that he is, indeed, in a different category.
 
any update on what how the store people captured one of the BGs? Any details on whether there were multiple guns/etc?? Gotta be more details :)
 
TBO,
The original meaning of "civilian," according to the OED, was someone who studied the Civil Law rather than the Canon Law. Then, later, someone concerned with Civil Law rather than Canon or Common Law.

If you balk at being called a civilian, it follows that you are not concerned with strict observance of citizens' rights and privileges, nor with application of written laws. In this context, it is obvious why soldiers are not civilians; they are not concerned with individual rights so much as winning battles. Therefore, we don't want the military engaged in law enforcement.

The OED does not mention law enforcement or emergency personnel under any of its definitions of "civilian." The OED is the standard dispute-resolution resource for serious people. Hopefully that means we can dispose of the amusing but flawed modern definitions.

OED entries for "civilian," "civil law," and "common law":
http://www.thefiringline.com/library/civilian.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top