sorry, you grew tired...but by your very posts of late, you have once again proven my point...your insults continue...
ipse
PS: to insure i am not inadvertently being insulting, could you point out in the recent posts between us where i have insulted you ~ either real or perceived?
Obtuse, got it. I especially like you cherry picking select parts of my post there while refusing to acknowledge the meaning of it its entirety. So lets start with your posts.
uh, cuz the TSA says it isn't?
as stated in the OPs initial post, according to TSA's website,
A weapon permit is not an acceptable form of identification.
https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/identification
No actual insult here, but it sets the stage for you being obtuse. Just because they ignore their own rules or flat out go against them doesn't make it right or acceptable. The problem then is in trying to get them to follow their own rules. Thus the proposed law would be to force them to follow their own rules that they have already outlined.
i guess you missed OPs statement as well as others including the big bold statement on the cited TSA's webpage stating weapon permits are not acceptable?
not sure how TSA is ignoring their own rules when their documentation specifically states permits are not acceptable form of identification?
not sure where the confusion lies ?
ipse
And here's the insult in addition to continuing to fail to understand what I'm saying. You're saying that I'm confused as if I don't understand that they state that a CHP (or whatever your state calls its permit) doesn't count. I fully understand it. You're also saying that I missed such a thing multiple times now, which I hadn't. The tone of the post also comes across as insulting in part due to the phrases "i guess you missed" and "not sure where the confusion lies?"
Just because someone disagrees doesn't mean that they're confused or missed something. While a possibility, it can also simply be that they came to a different conclusion, as in this case. I see the TSA as breaking their own rules as they had already defined acceptable forms of ID and alternate ID but then turn around and refuse to accept the CHP. This in turn makes it look like they're specifically targeting those that have a CHP as they refuse to accept even the ones that meet the outlined requirements.
Now you have been slow to understand that this is what I'm saying (obtuse). Sorry but that isn't an insult. Likewise being blunt isn't being insulting regardless of if some people feel that way. I acknowledged that some people who are thin skinned might be insulted, but even then I didn't call you thin skinned (unless you're self identifying as being thin skinned). I said that those who are thin skinned would view being blunt as insulting, but you tried to cherry pick what I said in order to make it seem as if I was calling you thin skinned.
So given your repeated attempts to twist what I was saying and in being either obtuse or simply trolling, I'm done with this discourse. It's obvious that it isn't likely to go anywhere and it feels like I'm :banghead: attempting to explain it, so I'm just going to save myself any further frustration.
