Why Are Threads Being Locked?

Can someone explain why perfectly good threads are being locked? For example, a thread I started about Chicago's plan to do away with a qualification exam for its police officers was locked.

One would think that the subject is something that should be discussed since it follows that open carriers may very well have contact with an unqualified police officer incapable of passing a simple entrance exam. The implications of minority applicants being unable to pass a standardized exam yet being allowed to carry a gun and patrol the streets is of paramount importance.

I realize that the domain owner has the right to do anything he wants with this domain and that I am free to post elsewhere. However, if we aren't allowed to contemplate and discuss the issues on a website that is alleged to support all of the Bill of Rights, to perceive patterns and devised solutions, then such issues and our approach to them have to be altered, by emotion into good things. Smiling and lighting candles seem to be only approved reactions in our nation. Here and in the real world.

Would it be to much to ask that when a thread is locked that a reason be given as to why it was locked? This will provide me with a better idea as to what is approved speech here and what topics are off limits. I and others can then modify our written thoughts to comply with the approved 'newspeak' that we are being conditioned to use here and in real life.

Thanks in advance.

Click to expand...

While perhaps stated over vehemently, I agree with your basic position that in some cases rather harmless topic that seem to be on topic for discussion surrounding OC have been locked. But the owners/mods here usually do not do this unless the discussion has spiraled into the smoking hole of personal attacks, or is unnecessarily unfriendly to Law Enforcement. I think the thread you started may have been perceived in this later light.

I do agree that when a thread is locked a simply post at the end stating why would be useful. I know I find it very irritating to have a contribution I wish to post only to discover there is no reply button available. A reason for the closing would be helpful and professional.

Regards

Click to expand...

While perhaps stated over vehemently...

Click to expand...

Hawkflyer wrote:

While perhaps stated over vehemently, I agree with your basic position that in some cases rather harmless topic that seem to be on topic for discussion surrounding OC have been locked. But the owners/mods here usually do not do this unless the discussion has spiraled into the smoking hole of personal attacks, or is unnecessarily unfriendly to Law Enforcement. I think the thread you started may have been perceived in this later light.

I do agree that when a thread is locked a simply post at the end stating why would be useful. I know I find it very irritating to have a contribution I wish to post only to discover there is no reply button available. A reason for the closing would be helpful and professional.

Regards

Click to expand...

It's only natural that threads will stray from the original topic since a discussion or debate brings in other tangential aspects of the issue in question. Locking threads because a post doesn't stay within the strict confines of the OP is a bit anal retentive. Notwithstanding any other known or unknown agenda.

Hawkflyer wrote:

While perhaps stated over vehemently...

Click to expand...

Did you really mean to use the phrase "over vehemently?" I see a pattern, where anytime I make a post that seems to cut straight to the heart of a matter, someone here will mis-characterize it as you did above.

vehement One entry found.

Main Entry: ve·he·ment
Pronunciation: ˈvē-ə-məntFunction: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin vehement-, vehemens, vement-, vemens
Date: 15th century
: marked by forceful energy : powerful <a vehement wind>: as a : intensely emotional : impassioned, fervid <vehement patriotism> b
(1) : deeply felt <a vehement suspicion>
(2) : forcibly expressed <vehement denunciations> c : bitterly antagonistic <a vehement debate>
— ve·he·ment·ly adverb

Click to expand...

Yes I meant to use that term with the most common meaning of "Forcefully stated". You have highlights one of the far less common meanings and that is why it is not listed first. It was intended to modify the level of MY support for your statement not to offend or criticize YOU. As I said I agree with your premise, I just would not have stated it as strongly and I obviously did not feel strongly enough on the issue to start a thread about it.

Click to expand...

Many of your posts seem directed toward sparking up a controversy about whether the US government -- or some other institution -- is controlled by some kind of jewish comspiracy.

Your threads jump from issue to issue so fast that it isimpossible to refute what you say about-- for example --Leo Frank, before breaking out intoa discussion about the federal reserve or Ezekiel's imperitive that"money changers" must die.

Although Idon't mind hijacking threads occassionally, the purposes of OCDOwould beillserved were it to encourage too much latitude in these areas.

Click to expand...

Hawkflyer wrote:

Yes I meant to use that term with the most common meaning of "Forcefully stated". You have highlights one of the far less common meanings and that is why it is not listed first. It was intended to modify the level of MY support for your statement not to offend or criticize YOU. As I said I agree with your premise, I just would not have stated it as strongly and I obviously did not feel strongly enough on the issue to start a thread about it.

Click to expand...

The practice seems a bit childish and I don't have time to waste on childish websites. Just a simple clarification as to why a thread is being locked will give me an idea as to whether this website is merely controlled opposition, a place to let keyboard warriors vent in hopes they take no action in the real world, or an intelligence and data collection operation.

In any case, I don't have time to waste on 'girly men' to afraid of their own shadow to state a true, scientifically supported opinion or statement because it may offend certain groups of people. Never mind that those people likely offended work in opposition to the stated cause of OCDO or can't distinguish between free speech and an ad hominem attack. This fact can't be lost on everyone here can it?

Click to expand...

The Donkey wrote:

Many of your posts seem directed toward sparking up a controversy about whether the US government -- or some other institution -- is controlled by some kind of jewish comspiracy.

Your threads jump from issue to issue so fast that it isimpossible to refute what you say about-- for example --Leo Frank, before breaking out intoa discussion about the federal reserve or Ezekiel's imperitive that"money changers" must die.

Although Idon't mind hijacking threads occassionally, the purposes of OCDOwould beillserved were it to encourage too much latitude in these areas.

Click to expand...

In some of my posts I have cited statutes, quotes, articles, etc. to support my positions. Such would be considered evidence and admissible at trial if related to the subject matter at issue.

If a fact is documented and out in the open it isn't a conspiracy. If it's not true then why so quick to shut down the debate on such subjects? Painting someone with the label 'conspiracy theorist' even if done in the subtle way you attempted shows your true colors.

Yes, each thread I post here addresses a different topic. That's the way it works on most forums. Since you seem to have firsthand knowledge of my posts, I'll take that as evidence that you're bright enough to keep up, and if you had anything to say that would refute my statements you would have posted such.

The ADL thread contained the information about Leo Frank and it was deleted. The post containing the Ezekiel quote was made several days after the aforementioned deleted post. You're conclusion above is a fallacy and is illogical.

I don't understand your last paragraph above where you state "OCDOwould beillserved were it to encourage too much latitude in these areas." Could you direct me to the post that describes what thoughts I should have and how I should perceive the issues discussed here? Such information will make it easier for me to parrot the pre-approved party line, ensure that I write nothing that provokes thought or offends the sensibilities of those who would like to see people like me dead and buried.

Click to expand...

Personal attacks common on other forums are viewed as unnecessary and counter productive here. Certainly that is true at the beginning of a discussion. Statements of "Fact" not support by specific citations and or links to supporting information are often challenged and dismissed as opinion and the general tone of conversation is higher as a result. Threads are closed if they become volleys of personal attacks, racist, overly anti LEO, or generally off of the topic of open carry. In fact, I would expect that this thread will be closed as off topic at some point.

Click to expand...

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the post that started with the ADL and the question of who judges who is an extremist for the purposes of confiscating guns devolve into a discussion of whether --in essence --Hitler was right because the Communists were a jewish movement?

I think that is what psychologists refer to as a "loosening of associations.

Click to expand...

I would also refer you to the post entitled "Basic Rules" which clarifies that this is not a "general discussion" type forum and prohibits discussions of other people's religions, etc.

Click to expand...

Last try:

Click to expand...

...SNIP
I don't understand why would this thread be locked? The original question hasn't been answered yet.

Click to expand...

Can someone explain why perfectly good threads are being locked? For example, a thread I started about Chicago's plan to do away with a qualification exam for its police officers was locked.

Click to expand...

ColMustard wrote:

...SNIP
I don't understand why would this thread be locked? The original question hasn't been answered yet.

Click to expand...

Your original question was -

Can someone explain why perfectly good threads are being locked? For example, a thread I started about Chicago's plan to do away with a qualification exam for its police officers was locked.

Click to expand...

Well if you read the forum rules here

You will see that this topic has no relationship to Open carry or firearms and as such it is off topic for the forum. That is why it will eventually be closed and or deleted.

Now you can protest that all you like but the fact is that the rule predates your membership here and it was a recognized and well know condition of membership and posting. So in part that is why I do not agree with the strength of your argument because frankly you really do not have much of a leg to stand on in objecting to the closure of off topic threads.

I also note that no matter how friendly and patient I try to be in discussing this with you, you seem to want to attribute ideas and concepts to me that I have never had in part in projecting. I have stayed very specifically on the topic of your original question in this thread. You on the other hand want to drag in other concepts from other threads that are not relevant.

I have tried to explain to you why threads get locked here (your topic), and the kinds of topics that leads to closures of threads (your topic). and you seem to want to argue with ME like I was the one closing your threads. I am NOT. If you follow the guidelines on the link above you will not have any problems. I am not the only one that has tried to tell you this. You keep saying that someone should put the rules out so you can find them. Well they are there if you take the time to read them. If you disagree with those guidelines then please, feel free to go.

Perhaps you will have a better reception on an open political forum, or a less topically specific forum. But frankly reviewing many of the threads you have opened I find that most are not related to Open carry of firearms and the remainder can only very loosely be connected back to firearms in general.

That is why your threads are being closed (your original question)

Click to expand...

...SNIP
Your making reasonable observations and presenting them in a manner no less than cordial.  I feel that you are lending your intelligence at a time when it might serve better to refrain from doing so.  Certain personalities require a time to deflate before productive conversation can begin.

Click to expand...