• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Taxwhat running for sheriff !

Ezerharden

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
723
Location
Erie, MI
I am about as far from Republican as any person here, so my intent was not to have you think that his running as a Republican somehow makes him worthy. I'd support him no matter what political affiliation he chose to align with.

Yep, some of us here hold him in high esteem, and our respect for him may be interpreted as something other than respect that was earned. Speaking for myself, I think he was instrumental in getting OC where it is today. Such things we do so well today such as FOIAs, getting the press in involved, and attendance at governmental meetings were things that he had a direct role in developing. Although I think that it took more than one person and there were many involved, his assistance was instrumental. Yes, he had a penchant for being a PITA for those public officials who thought themselves above the law and, in exposing the "Emporers who wore no clothes" he ruffled many locals' feathers. The criticism he received in the press from community members was viciously personal at times, but he dealt with it despite personal hardships the likes of which I hope to never experience.

If I could, I'd vote for him for two reasons: He'd follow the law as opposed to local opinion and he was always brutally honest. Even though there were times I disagreed with him, he never let the disagreement color his interaction with me. In any public office, who better than one who, from my experience, puts personal issues aside and follows what the law demands.

Well as I stated, I was asking a question, not making an accusation. I see no reason for the responses I received. A simple explanation of the situation would have been sufficient. I never "vilified" him. I am neither R or D, I vote on the person, not the party. First, I was unsure if this is the same guy I had heard about, second, I have heard the negative opinions with no details (go figure) and was seeking opinions and information from those that seemed supportive of him.

Guess I will slither back into my pay grade now that I have been properly put in my place.
 
Last edited:

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
Ezerharden said:
Damn, so much for being able to ask a question . . . Sorry I don't blindly follow the Republican vote . . .

The only question from you was "didn't he shoot a dog?". We answered, "Yes, it was a good shoot." Why are you so testy about a short answer to your short question?

I'm libertarian, and many here are also not Republican strictly speaking. Not wise to connect our straightforward answers to any one party. Want to try again?
 

DrTodd

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,272
Location
Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
Damn, so much for being able to ask a question without getting your a$$ ripped in half. I only heard about it, but could never find any article with details. Next time I have a question I will ask the DNC, might be less hostile.

Sorry I don't blindly follow the Republican vote, seeing how useful a state .gov controlled by them has been to gun rights here in MI. After all, we have to have a rally to get stuff voted on by the same Republican controlled Senate right?

Until people start to realize that there are many Republicans who only support the 2nd Amendment when it serves them in getting votes from gun owners who are too lazy to actually consider voting for anyone who isn't a Republican, nothing will change. I have said it before and I'll say it again because it is true. Governor Granholm, when she was Michigan's AG, did more for the right to carry than just about anyone in this state... this despite being personally opposed to CC, at least in the beginning. Look at her opinions as AG, she followed the law. Yep, she made some poor policy as Governor in other areas, but as AG, I think she was second to none when it came to expanding our rights as gun owners.
 

Ezerharden

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
723
Location
Erie, MI
The only question from you was "didn't he shoot a dog?". We answered, "Yes, it was a good shoot." Why are you so testy about a short answer to your short question?

I'm libertarian, and many here are also not Republican strictly speaking. Not wise to connect our straightforward answers to any one party. Want to try again?

Actually I asked "wasn't he the guy that shot the dog" implying I wasn't even sure if it was the same person. I tried to look up the information, but all I could come up with was a bunch of BS comments on a local area forum connected to the paper around here. All those comments were very full of opinion and real weak on facts. As I was a bit rushed when I asked, I just assumed that people would see it as a question, since most accusations are made as statements.

Please tell me how my asking this:

Wasn't he in the news for shooting a neighbors dog once?

is grounds for this comment?

So, why vilify him for something he did that was legal?
 

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
I have heard the negative opinions with no details (go figure) and was seeking opinions and information

You heard he shot a dog. He's not in jail, but in fact a free man running for Sheriff. What does that tell you about whether it was a good shoot or not?

Are you intentionally trolling, or do you not realize a man who is free and running for sheriff, after shooting a dog, obviously was cleared in the dog-shooting?
 

Ezerharden

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
723
Location
Erie, MI
Who said you were making an accusation? You seem to be acting a bit paranoid.

Well normally the act of vilifying someone is done with an accusation.
From the dictionary:

Definition of VILIFY
1
: to lower in estimation or importance
2
: to utter slanderous and abusive statements against : defame

Now that this has been beat to death, lets try this again.

What are the reasons he is being supported? I have heard some, I would like more as there is limited information on him online.
 

Ezerharden

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
723
Location
Erie, MI
You heard he shot a dog. He's not in jail, but in fact a free man running for Sheriff. What does that tell you about whether it was a good shoot or not?

Are you intentionally trolling, or do you not realize a man who is free and running for sheriff, after shooting a dog, obviously was cleared in the dog-shooting?

Not being in jail is no proof of innocence. You can't tell me that you have never heard of a person that is guilty of a crime being acquitted on some idiotic reason.
 

Ezerharden

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
723
Location
Erie, MI
But again, back OT:

I am asking for information about him. I am interested in any information, not only his stance on gun's (though that is my primary area of concern).
 

Ezerharden

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
723
Location
Erie, MI
You are innocent until proven guilty. I'm libertarian, I believe in the whole "innocent unless proven guilty" principle, so don't come at me with that weak sh*t.

Yep so do I, however, how many people are released from prison after being "proven guilty" after new evidence (DNA in many cases) exonerates them? It isn't a perfect system, and absolutes don't work.

Before anyone goes digging out stats on it, even 1 person wrongfully convicted is too many.
 
Last edited:

Raggs

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2012
Messages
1,181
Location
Wild Wild West Michigan
Yep so do I, however, how many people are released from prison after being "proven guilty" after new evidence (DNA in many cases) exonerates them? It isn't a perfect system, and absolutes don't work.

Before anyone goes digging out stats on it, even 1 person wrongfully convicted is too many.

+1
 

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
Ezerharden said:
DanM said:
You are innocent until proven guilty. I'm libertarian, I believe in the whole "innocent unless proven guilty" principle . . .

Yep so do I, however, how many people are released from prison after being "proven guilty" after new evidence (DNA in many cases) exonerates them?

I believe in the principle I stated above. The fact that some innocent people are convicted and some guilty are free is not in dispute and is a red herring. You cannot translate that fact to being able to point to any single individual and say they are wrongly convicted or wrongly presumed innocent unless you have evidence for that assertion. Until then, they remain "found guilty" or "presumed innocent and found not guilty". Taxwhat is in that latter category.

You are attempting to throw up smoke in the thread, for what purpose I know not, but we are not dumb. To summarize the essential back-and-forth with you so far, you ask about Taxwhat's dog shooting, we answer he did nothing wrong, you come back with views like "well, not being in jail is no proof of innocence".

Really, what's your purpose with all that?
 

Ezerharden

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
723
Location
Erie, MI
My purpose was initially to gather information. I received some information. I also was accused of vilifying him with my question. I am then told that because he is not in jail, he is innocent. I do not dispute that, however I did point out that is not automatically the same as being innocent as ou legal system has some issues at times.

Now for the FOURTH time, I ask for information about Jan Jays as a candidate for Monroe County Sheriff. What his platform is, what he is running on, etc. I WILL NOT respond to any more comments except those that are in answer to my question I have asked multiple times.
 

Evil Creamsicle

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
1,264
Location
Police State, USA
Dan it seems to me that you really blew Ezerharden's statements way way out of proportion, and continuing to discuss it in this manner is not beneficial.

You state he should support Jan, He wants more information on Jan. You could provide this information, and then this topic would be useful again.
 

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
Dan it seems to me that you really blew Ezerharden's statements way way out of proportion . . . You state he should support Jan, He wants more information on Jan.

I really don't want to disproportionately respond to folks. So I went back and looked at the conversation. Below is the gist of our responses to each other. I note that his first post was not as you characterize "wants more information on Jan" . . . it was asking about the dog-shoot, to which I appropriately responded.

Ezerharden said:
Wasn't he in the news for shooting a neighbors dog once?
DanM said:
Yes. Good shoot. Perfect example of the need to be armed at all times. Your point?
Question answered. I was interested if there was a point to the question. Sometimes there is. I ask a fair, open-ended question, to which he is free to respond as he wants. He could answer, "I'm just interested in more information on Jan." But he doesn't . . .

Ezerharden said:
Damn, so much for being able to ask a question . . . Sorry I don't blindly follow the Republican vote . . .
DanM said:
The only question from you was "didn't he shoot a dog?". We answered, "Yes, it was a good shoot." Why are you so testy about a short answer to your short question? I'm libertarian, and many here are also not Republican strictly speaking. Not wise to connect our straightforward answers to any one party. Want to try again?
He was testy. I was curious about why he was testy. Also, he lumped all respondents up to that point (including me) in with the "Republican vote" based on our answers to him. As a libertarian, such glib categorization of me is particularly offensive. I rightfully asked him to try his response again (hopefully with a better one).

Ezerharden said:
Well as I stated, I was asking a question, not making an accusation.
DanM said:
Who said you were making an accusation? You seem to be acting a bit paranoid.
Up to this point in time, no one said he was making an accusation. That comment from him . . . and his testiness I noted before . . . and his lumping us all in as part of the "Republican vote" . . . sure was coming off to me as smelling like paranoia, especially that last comment from him.

And I've reviewed the rest of mine and his back-and-forth. Sorry, I see the balance of disproportionality as squarely in his court.
 
Top