And now for the rest of the story. Watermellon has viagra type chemicals in it. I will eat more.
You never know what kind of day an officer's had (real bad guys/supervisors/dog's chasing him on his bike/wife/ex-wife/bills, etc, etc) before you try out your little joke and, please, remember, officers are just human. I'm a retired Trooper and I can say that there are lots of other things on our minds, even when we stop for a quck donut. When will I be able to get another donut? Will I get run over by an idiot in a car or be shot to death by a criminal before I can get that next donut? Hey, the next time you see him you might want to buy him a donut.
Larry
You never know what kind of day an officer's had (real bad guys/supervisors/dog's chasing him on his bike/wife/ex-wife/bills, etc, etc) before you try out your little joke and, please, remember, officers are just human. I'm a retired Trooper and I can say that there are lots of other things on our minds, even when we stop for a quck donut. When will I be able to get another donut? Will I get run over by an idiot in a car or be shot to death by a criminal before I can get that next donut? Hey, the next time you see him you might want to buy him a donut.
Larry
I gather your point is that they should not be so thinned skinned. If so I agree wholeheartedly but would take it a bit further and say your point is relevant for human beings generally. That in the absence of overt malice there is not reason to get offended for no reason. You made a very good point IMOIn their line of work they should have a "cool head" and not be "insulted" when someone offers them a tasty treat. They should be trained to evaluate the "whole situation" before making a judgment. I realize that LEO are human and have feelings like the average citizen. The cops in both situations should have handled themselves a little better.
I gather your point is that they should not be so thinned skinned. If so I agree wholeheartedly but would take it a bit further and say your point is relevant for human beings generally. That in the absence of overt malice there is not reason to get offended for no reason. You made a very good point IMO
That said though I do not agree with the gist of ishi's post which I read as justifying the LEO inappropriate responce he did simply compare two well known stereo types to make his point. One of the stereo type is considered racist but neither his post or his point was racist. It was a valid comparison IMO.
By being offended by it really contradicted your own post. Just a thought not meant to offend you at all.[/QUOTE]
For the record, I wasn't offended. Simply felt that the analogy was inappropriate. BTW, I'm not black. :wink:
gf
If the analogy was not offensive to you than what is the problem? How is it inappropriate if it is not offensive? Not black. Red? Brown? Just curious as it seems that some white folks are more defensive than people of color about these lame stereo types. Regardless not to drag this out. There was no malice in the OPs comments, just as there was no malice in the analogy but in both cases folks opted to take it wrong. Why? All I am saying is donuts, watermelon, fried chicken, beans, or rice what ever lighten up who cares why let any of it bother youFor the record, I wasn't offended. Simply felt that the analogy was inappropriate. BTW, I'm not black. :wink: