Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/17/2017 in all areas

  1. 9 points
    Some of you are quick to give up rights. Here's the problem: once they're gone, you'll never get it back. The Second Amendment protects our right to bear arms just like the First Amendment protects our right to free speech (Congress shall make no law). It's not a negotiable document. As stated above, we have a violence problem and a mental health problem in this country. Making law abiding citizens into criminals won't solve that. Punishing the millions of law abiding gun owners because of the acts of a few psychopaths won't solve that either. Whether you agree with it or not, the Second Amendment was designed to defend the First Amendment. We are absolutely intended to be as well armed as the military because the founders wanted the government to fear the people and not the other way around. We've already given up enough (NFA, etc). Now is not the time to give up because of one horrific incident. It's a very slippery slope.
  2. 9 points
    The second amendment is not about hunting. The second amendment is not about a home invasion. The second amendment is not about “toys”. The constitution does not grant rights. Neither does the government. The constitution enumerates our rights. The constitution does not empower government. It limits government. Kinda surprising to be having this conversation on this forum; expecting it from progressives.
  3. 9 points
    Shall not be infringed. It's the only justification necessary.
  4. 9 points
    Personally, I'd hoped Tonto would go more R Lee Ermey with his thoughts: that we are all Airmen, and everything else is secondary to that, especially when engaged in combat. Diversity of immutable characteristics is meaningless. Diversity of thought, of culture, and of ideas is actually a strength. 30 years ago when the concept "diversity is a strength" came to social prominence, things like race, sex, and religion were used as an analog (unfortunately, for simplicity) for diversity of thought, culture, and ideas. Unfortunately, those things are not analogs...and now so many members of society are idiotically focused on diversity of immutable characteristics, as if that matters any further than eyewash to make folks feel inclusive. That focus is actually a weakness for a fighting organization. Of course, we all know that the AF is generally more concerned with how things look than how things actually are...so more of the same, I suppose.
  5. 8 points
    Knocking over porta-potties with their buds inside is "kids being kids", in my opinion. Personally, I want nothing to to with "kids" that want to tag a historic church with satanic graffiti. I don't believe this behavior meets the cut, and I do not want them in my country's military Additionally, had the target of their vandalism been a synagogue, NAACP office, or a building flying a gay pride flag... with the appropriate words that get media attention... the outrage would have been front page national news. These Airmen are broken. Get new ones. We have almost nothing invested in them. Just one man's opinion.
  6. 7 points
    Goldfein should fire this guy on the spot for insubordination. Only that type of drastic action will move the needle.
  7. 7 points
    I'm never flying commercially again.
  8. 6 points
  9. 6 points
    And back in the founding father’s days, you could buy or make weapons on par with, or superior to, the military and government weapons of the day. I want a hellfire missile.
  10. 6 points
    It's not ridiculous, because that's how the argument needs to be framed. The world does not have a "gun violence" problem, or a "Ryder truck violence" problem. It has a violence problem. Madmen commit violence. That's where we need to focus our efforts and our arguments. Madmen have used fertilizer, airplanes, fire, gas chambers, trucks, pressure cookers, bombs, guns, knives, hammers, and rope. The chosen method is irrelevant. Guns have taken on this bigger than life persona when they are simply tools. AR-15s are ideally suited for plenty of non-murderous tasks, just like rope is good for a lot more than lynching. If the locomotive of society decides that guns are bad, there's no stopping the degradation of our rights. But we'll simply find that when you peel away the "tool" layer, you're still left with a core of violence. The Brits are learning this now as they move to rearm their police. So as to the better idea, let's start with the family. How can we reinforce the family so it can serve as a training ground for acceptable behavior?
  11. 6 points
    Race is neither an analog for culture nor economic status, FWIW. There are people from every race that have a "disadvantaged background". No race has the market cornered in western society on "advantage" or "disadvantage", because race is a meaningless quality in a meritocracy. Nonetheless, even when speaking of economic or social status, "equality" doesn't mean "equity." We don't have equity, nor in a society that values both individual liberty, egalitarianism, and personal responsibility do we desire such a thing. It is the "land of equal opportunity", not the land of "equal outcomes".
  12. 6 points
    Cancelled my NFL Ticket today. ATT/Directv are granting waivers if you cite the player protest as a reason. The agent asked me why I wanted to cancel and I told him I was a veteran and opposed to the players protesting during the National Anthem, he actually replied "Sir we are not allowed to talk politics on the phone but WE AGREE WITH YOU, your NFL Ticket is cancelled and we are processing a refund, thank you for your service!"
  13. 6 points
    Here at a major airline, if I think about flying my flight duty period has started ....
  14. 5 points
    I enjoy the irony of putting "Quiet Professional" on there.
  15. 5 points
  16. 5 points
    What's with so many people willing to give something -- anything -- up? This is the strongest legislative position the 2A has been in for decades. I'm not voting to give *anything* up.
  17. 5 points
    Eagle Driver Commemorative Watch
  18. 5 points
    They are not synonymous in the social sciences, and they have very specific meanings in the context of this discussion. Equality refers to the quality of being equal in objective status in society -- that people are all the same under the law. Equity refers to the equal quality of balance and fairness in society in terms of means and ways -- it is most applicable to discussion of relative economic means and perceived/actual social power. One refers to opportunity and access, the other refers to outcomes. One is the core of individualism. The other is the core of collectivism. But, thanks.
  19. 4 points
    Meh, fuck 'em. If he's pissed enough, maybe they'll kick you out and you'll be happier at the airlines 5 years sooner. An OG getting butt hurt about something like this, and the fact you're fearful of reprisal, is messed up. Totally believable, but just plain wrong. SMH. We need better O-6s and above.
  20. 4 points
    There are not two classes of citizens in the United States. We are all equal...and all worthy of the same rights, privileges, and restrictions under the law. Police are not "super-citizens".
  21. 4 points
    I disagree. On the long look of human history, violence, war, and untimely death is WAY DOWN. We’re living in a golden age of peace and prosperity.
  22. 4 points
  23. 4 points
    You'll lose. Automatics are illegal. Grenades. We need to do better than arguing the old men who wrote the 2nd amendment surely would have been cool with what happened in Vegas. Automatics are not illegal and neither are grenades. Why would using the Second Amendment cause me to lose? Do you support the Constitution or not?
  24. 4 points
    You have to be just good enough to be useful, but not so good that you get called up for school/staff/etc. it’s a fine line.
  25. 4 points
    The problem is that half of America thinks that what he's saying takes courage because the rest of the people in charge are unquestionably white supremacists.
  26. 4 points
    I would like this Air Force back please.
  27. 4 points
  28. 4 points
    I like this change. I've asked for crew rest waivers and been denied. If the SQ/CC and AC want it and judge the mission benefit worth the risk, it's dumb that someone disconnected from the mission can deny it. I guess every corner of the AF is different but our waiver authority is MAJCOM A3 who is not tracking daily missions and will always say no, even for TIC support. So to me, this is a good change because it removes obstacles to the mission. If you're worried your leadership will now bully you into accepting missions you aren't safe to execute, well that sucks. Say no, that's always your right.
  29. 4 points
    I interviewed both of the widows of the two pilots killed in the Constant Peg programme. Their stories are heart wrenching and their emotions were raw even after the passage of so many years. It took 30 years for one of them to find out how, where and what her husband was doing when he died. The other had a pretty good idea what her husband was doing, as I suspect the Schultz family does, but that's not the same as knowing for sure, and it's not the same as getting real answers. "Doc" Schultz may have made the ultimate sacrifice, and I doff my hat to him, but his wife and five children are the ones who must live with the consequences. In my mind, they are the real heroes. My thoughts go out to them.
  30. 4 points
    "positive rate" "nice" "how's the wife?" 45 mins later - oh shit, gear up
  31. 3 points
  32. 3 points
    I would suggest putting this through the OODA Loop and cascading effects, as well as sending an ALCON letter starting with the BLUF. After those wickets the answer will be obvious, V/R, Congressman
  33. 3 points
    So that's why most of the folks in the newhire class pictures are women and minorities....
  34. 3 points
    Your analogy lost me, how could masturbating ever be a waste of time?
  35. 3 points
    Plane - Total time/IP time T6 - 825/655 MC12 - 754/0 KC135 - 1200/600 I was direct to A-code for each plane, so I used 85% of total time for PIC time. Just got an invite to AA interview. UPS app is "active," which means it meets their scoring criteria. I just signed up for the SWA hiring window, so we'll see if I get a call from them. The only internal recommendation I have at the moment is with UPS. My availability date is set to 1 Jan 2018, so I was surprised to get a hit from AA for the video interview in early September. I also got a CJO at a regional, but that wasn't surprising.
  36. 3 points
  37. 3 points
    So, you would not consider the incremental addition of firearms laws over the last 100 years... - NFA 1934 - GCA 1968 - Brady Bill 1993 - AWB 1994 - the varied state AWB/magazine/etc bans implemented since then ...as prima facie evidence a "slippery slope" of increasing restrictions over time? BTW, the fundamental difference between a topic like gay marriage and gun control is that one issue is trying to increase liberty, and the other is trying to restrict it. Increasing liberty has no finite end...it is potentially boundless. Restricting liberty has a very specific finite end that it can reach.
  38. 3 points
    That's the beautiful thing about being a free man living in a liberal democracy: it isn't about "need". The whole point is that free citizens are allowed to pursue whatever makes them happy (within the limitations of not violating the rights of others) without having to garner the approval or permission or validation of any other person or organization. "Because I want to" is all the "need" anyone requires.
  39. 3 points
    He said 3 years non-flying AT an AOC. He did not say 3 years non-flying AS an AOC.
  40. 3 points
    Absurd, to use your words. A completely arbitrary restriction on a core Constitutionally-protected right because you *think* it should be...not because of any philosophical or legal underpinning of why, and proposed without a shred of evidence as to efficacy or specific purpose. The entire point of Constitutional protection is to put the burden of proof on the proposer of new restrictions to show specifically why those restrictions should be allowed, including proving that philosophical and legal validation and as well as efficacy of the proposal...because you don't just curb rights "to see if it works". The status quo doesn't have to defend itself. So, for anyone making these proposals, start off your discussion by making these points, rather than making the statement and demanding that others prove "why not".
  41. 3 points
    Well of course there is.... but it will all go away just as soon as we adopt socialism.... didn't your college professors tell you anything?
  42. 3 points
    ...or the idea that anyone actually believes there is "institutional racism" in the United States in 2017.
  43. 3 points
    I may screw over a bro?? Pushing the blame on me because I'm looking out for me and my family is misguided. It's akin to a gunman holding a gun to a hostage... and blaming the police if the hostage gets shot because they didn't comply with the demands. Those that feel they are getting a raw deal aren't leaving the AF because they are getting screwed over by their "bros". It's because of the AF's policies and actions. Not mine. Fortunately, my experience in the U-2 Program was one of very supportive and understanding commanders that didn't act vindictively towards those whose intent to separate was known.
  44. 3 points
    AFRC selected: 29 Sep 2017 OTS: 9 January! Wahoo! So hired at squadron level 10 Feb and my OTS class starts 9 Jan. 11 months total
  45. 3 points
    Stay-at-home, trophy husband. That’s my plan. We will see what my wife says.
  46. 3 points
    No bro, if you’re just having coffee and waiting for brief time to start. Am I not allowed to look at mission slides before official brief time? some of you guys are so official it’s amazing anything gets done.
  47. 3 points
    This change is going to work people to the bone and possibly kill them, what a terrible idea.
  48. 3 points
    It seems to me that there is a problem with the understanding the definition of the terms here. To get a clearance, you first have to have a completed security investigation. Certain types of investigations are necessary for different levels of clearances, and the type of investigation is determined by the anticipated clearance level of the projected duty . For instance a NACLE will allow up to Secret, while an SSBI will allow up to TS and above (i.e. SCI accesses). The investigation type is determined by the sponsor depending on level needed for your anticipated future job. A completed investigation does not give you a clearance, only the eligibility (assuming adjudication is favorable) After the investigation, the report is sent to an adjudication authority, who evaluates the report and decides if the results warrant giving you a clearance (i.e., decides whether or not you are a security risk or not). If the adjudication is positive, you become eligible for a clearance. Eligible doesn't mean you have a clearance, only that you are allowed to get one if needed. For rated officer entry selects, an SSBI investigation is normally done, although in today's backlogged system, for OTS people it is sometimes not completed prior to graduating. For ROTC it depends on timing but the investigation should be complete by graduation and commissioning. But, you still don't have a clearance, only the eligibility for one. Somewhere down the road you arrive at your first duty station. There, you will be placed in a specific position on the unit's manning document, and each position has a clearance level associated with it. For a UPT student, the positions are coded for a Secret clearance (or used to be) so upon arrival you will be given a Secret clearance. The fact that your SSBI investigation makes you eligible for TS does not matter if the manpower position only requires a Secret clearance. By the way, an IP coming in from another unit where he/she held a TS, will be downgraded to a Secret in most cases because an IP has no need for TS clearance in an IP slot (unless he/she will also be doing some addition duty for the Wing that has a higher clearance requirement, which is probably fairly uncommon). That may be different for CSO or ABM training if their syllabus works with more classified content. For the rest of your career, your clearance may go back and forth as you move from job to job, even within the same unit on occasion.. As for the "inactive" comment, if you move to a job where no clearance is needed (get out of the service, for instance, or leave ROTC (commission, but do not go directly onto active duty) your clearance would be suspended (inactive), but can be regained quickly when you return to active duty as long as you are within the period of your investigation's validity (i.e., if the SSBI requires a re-investigation every five years, and you've been off active duty/ROTC training status for only a year, the original SSBI would still be valid and allow for your unit to re-establish a clearance when you process in...no additional investigation required.
  49. 3 points
    So at what point prior to the next board is the AF going to provide CC's the spine to truly mentor and state an individuals worth in the squadron to their face? This is a novel concept by the Secretary, but I posit that it will not happen in the next 4 years. CC's typically let someone else do their dirty work or have become all too accustomed to utilizing PRF subtleties to eliminate an individual.
  50. 3 points
    Where Are the Heroes