# Change Residency



## davejoyce2000 (Jun 26, 2007)

I was living at two towns for more than a year before I took the police exam. I put Boston as my residency. How can I change my residency to my other town which I also lived there for more than a year before I took the exam?


----------



## LTSO16 (May 30, 2007)

I thought it was only the one town that you lived in for the year prior to the exam. I emailed HRD a similar ? and they also were very straight forward when they reminded me that I signed the form stating that is where I lived. Like anything with CS though I could be wrong.


----------



## PBiddy35 (Aug 27, 2004)

I believe we signed something saying that our residence preference is for the PRIMARY residence for the past year as evidenced by housing payments, billing addresses, car registrations, etc. I think your SOL


----------



## BartA1 (May 5, 2002)

from the way it was explained to me. Its your address where you lived for 12 months prior to the exam. If you were six months in town a and six months in town b. You dont get residency preference for either. So if your talking the current exam it would be where you lived from May 2006 to May 2007 no changes. I had a buddy who moved during the 12 month period of an exam years ago and he could not claim residency preference anywhere. So I doubt you will be able to change your residency preference because I am pretty sure on the form you submitted on the exam you claimed you lived at one address for 12 months prior to the exam 

Good LUck


----------



## WaterPistola (Nov 4, 2007)

that really sucks for your buddy, thankfully CS didn't record my house at school as my residence


----------



## djbfc (Nov 2, 2005)

Has anyone been hired by a CS town *without residency* and without veteran status??? or is it not likely??


----------



## Guest (Apr 16, 2008)

djbfc said:


> Has anyone been hired by a CS town *without residency* and without veteran status??? or is it not likely??


It's happened, but usually only in very small towns. Larger towns and cities very rarely if ever hire non-residents off the list, unless they have survivor preference (father or mother died LOD).


----------



## LA Copper (Feb 11, 2005)

SGT_GRUNT_USMC said:


> What's the big deal with residency in Mass.anyway?I grew up in Mass. (Metrowest area).I'm a Police Officer with the Las Vegas Metro PD now
> and have traveled all over the USA.Mass. is the only place where I've seen residency take such a huge precedence in police hiring.Why is that?When did it start?Here in Vegas, residency has absolutely no bearing on the hiring process in any law enforcement agency and there is no residency requirement once hired.You aren't even required to live in the State of Nevada.Veterans get 2 points added to their score which is combined with an oral board and written exam (hardest one I ever took).


What he said!


----------



## Guest (Apr 23, 2008)

Yes, some have been employed with neither the benefit of having been a resident of the city (or town) in which they were hired nor having served their country during wartime. Those whom have been employed (without said preferences) were not merely hired within larger towns and cities, nor did they all attain their subsequent employment through any sort of survivor preferences appropriated them.


----------



## Guest (Apr 24, 2008)

djbfc said:


> Has anyone been hired by a CS town *without residency* and without veteran status??? or is it not likely??


Yes, some have been employed with neither the benefit of having been a resident of the city (or town) in which they were hired, nor having served their country during wartime. Those whom have been employed (without said preferences), were not merely hired within larger towns and cities, nor did they all attain their subsequent employment through any sort of survivor preferences appropriated them.


----------



## 94c (Oct 21, 2005)

Grasshopper said:


> Yes, some have been employed with neither the benefit of having been a resident of the city (or town) in which they were hired, nor having served their country during wartime. Those whom have been employed (without said preferences), were not merely hired within larger towns and cities, nor did they all attain their subsequent employment through any sort of survivor preferences appropriated them.


were said persons hired off of any minority preference list?


----------



## LawWoman (Jan 17, 2005)

hmmm sounds like someone does not like minorities, does that go for women to?


----------



## 94c (Oct 21, 2005)

LawWoman said:


> hmmm sounds like someone does not like minorities, does that go for women to?


Only bimbos like you...



Grasshopper said:


> Yes, some have been employed with neither the benefit of having been a resident of the city (or town) in which they were hired, nor having served their country during wartime. Those whom have been employed (without said preferences), were not merely hired within larger towns and cities, nor did they all attain their subsequent employment through any sort of survivor preferences appropriated them.


were any of them asian females?

Sorry, but I don't agree in a world where everyone wants to be treated equally and then feel they should get certain preferences.


----------



## redsox03 (Jan 6, 2007)

94c said:


> Sorry, but I don't agree in a world where everyone wants to be treated equally and then feel they should get certain preferences.


:dito:


----------



## LawWoman (Jan 17, 2005)

Bimbo, well said. So back to my original question? Is it safe to assume you agree with a world where the white man only prevails, just a question, be honset and answer it.


----------



## Guest (Apr 27, 2008)

Mr. 94c, I have to get to Mass. So, I’ll make this brief. I was vacillating as to whether or not I should dignify your not so subtly veiled racially (as well as gender) disparaging interrogative since I have respect for my elders and I didn’t want to take a chance that at your age, you might not be able to take the embarrassment that I lay upon you, however the answer to your question is resounding and definitive NO!

I’ll elaborate when I return from church but if you would like a little prelude to the illuminating of your ignorance:

1.	Look up applicable case law.
2.	Research the demographics of recent academy classes (compare ratios of minorities to non and contrast their qualifications)
3.	Look up what preferences (i.e. veteran’s, residency, language, etc.) may be available from Boston as well other such cities, towns or the state. Is minority preference one of such preferences?
4.	See if Asians are considered minorities when it comes to affirmative action hires or under what circumstances they might be.


----------



## kwflatbed (Dec 29, 2004)

Grasshopper said:


> Mr. 94c, I have to get to Mass. So, I'll make this brief. I was vacillating as to whether or not I should dignify your not so subtly veiled racially (as well as gender) disparaging interrogative since I have respect for my elders and I didn't want to take a chance that at your age, you might not be able to take the embarrassment that I lay upon you, however the answer to your question is resounding and definitive NO!
> 
> I'll elaborate when I return from church but if you would like a little prelude to the illuminating of your ignorance:
> 
> ...


The only one that should be embarrassed by this post is you,it's time for you to mind your Ps & Qs and learn to listen to experience.


----------



## LawWoman (Jan 17, 2005)

No kwflatbead you need to watch your P & Qs, grashopper is right on and I am looking forward to his next post. As for you I have spent a few hours looking at past posts because I have not been on this thing in a while, and now I remember why, not sure if its the racist and mosogynist attitude some people on here (94c/redsox) have no problem displaying. 

I was trying to get 94c to just admit it, but obviously he does not have the courage of his convictions.

I appears the closest you have been to being a Police Officer is a hot shot "moderator" on Police web board, congrats on promotion "sir" Correct me if I am wrong, but I did not see anything on your website about prior Police service, just a bunch of trucks. 

This whole minority bashing is just ridiculous. Of all the "special" categories for the CS exam are you trying to sell the BS that only minorities are a category where someone might get hired that does not belong on the job. So Vets, sons/daughters and other categories are automatically qualified and deserve the job and there is no chance that someone in those categories could not be "right" for the job.


----------



## kwflatbed (Dec 29, 2004)

LawWoman said:


> No kwflatbead you need to watch your P & Qs, grashopper is right on and I am looking forward to his next post. As for you I have spent a few hours looking at past posts because I have not been on this thing in a while, and now I remember why, not sure if its the racist and mosogynist attitude some people on here (94c/redsox) have no problem displaying.
> 
> I was trying to get 94c to just admit it, but obviously he does not have the courage of his convictions.
> 
> ...


Believe me my expertise with racial issues in the workplace probably outweigh yours and grasshoppers combined,my job experience is not only with trucks.

As you said I have never been a cop, thanks to the judges,and the forced
changing of the testing to non blue book in the 60s then freezing of the results of the tests because minority's could not pass them.Then changing them again to make them easier yet again.

I had a family to support so I had to change my direction,but my employment with a fourtune 500 company put me in a place where I dealt
with labor problems dealing with minority hireing on a lot bigger scale then
local city PDs have.

Your pointing a finger at 94c as a racist or minority hater makes me laugh,
you should do some more reading of past threads and just mabey you would learn something,but with your attitude I doubt it.

To end yes vets deserve the job before all of the above listings that you gave.


----------



## LawWoman (Jan 17, 2005)

I won't pretend to know about your experiences in the private sector, nor will I fault you for taking care of your family. 

I'm guessing that you harbor a general animosity for all minorites/females because of policies, quotas or alike, I hope you know just becasue someone gets a job because of a special status that they are not the problem. I also support Vets, hell my brother and father are vets. But you will not convince me that just because someone is a vet they should be a cop, that is not a rational argument, hell I know cops that should not be cops.

Just because someone is a son/daughter of a fallen cop does not mean that should be a cop. 

The larger point I am trying to make is that there is a double standard, if a minority get the job despite weather they got preference or not, it seems you and others here will mutha fuck that person based on that alone. But if someone gets on and they turn out to be fucked up on the job its ok, because they are a vet or a son/daughter, which is BS. That is what I am getting at.

Here is scenerio about a hispanic female I went to the academy with. A few years p/t and a few years f/t working for non CS P.D. She took the CS exam and placed in the 60s on CS list for a bordering town. 

The chief knew her, knew she had f/t experience, obviously a f/t academy, Masters and a impressive Police career at that point. He had 1 slot and like any smart chief, wanted to fill it with a experienced academy trained Police Officer. So he calls for the minority list because he knew she would be reachable, and hired her after a thourough backround. Very qualified with 2 accomodatons and her chief does not just pass out accomodations for fun. She gets hired of the big, bad minority list. 

So now god help her if she every has to deal with the likes of you or 94c because right of the bat you are gonna mutha fuck her and say, "look, a hispanic female that only got hired cause she is a female/minority. 

Now I will say this, there should NO preference for anyone, NON. But there is and that won't change, it doesnt mean you go around mutha fucking every minority you see on the job, because if you are, then you better mutha fuck EVERYONE who got hired using some sort of minority preference because anyone of them could be a fuck up that only got on because of said "special status", thats all I am saying.


----------



## Andy0921 (Jan 12, 2006)

Like many others and I have said time after time; AA is reverse-discrimination pure and simple.


> Is it safe to assume you agree with a world where the white man only prevails, just a question, be honset and answer it.


 Here we go yet again with "you goddamn Christian white males think you're superior to everyone" BS.

The only thing us superior, godlike, superhuman white males covet is genuine EQAULITY. We believe people should be hired base solely on merit and qualifications.

When I'm on the ground fighting with some bare assed, greased up, psych patient on PCP wielding a knife, I want to know my back up is actually capable of helping me and didn't get the job solely because he/she is black (African American, excuse me) or has a pussy (vulva, excuse me).

Some of my closest LEO friends are black and female, and do you know what? EVERY single one of them is against race/gender preference. Why? Because their accomplishments are labeled as a product of gender/racial preference INSTEAD of their hard work and genuine aptitude.

As long as all of these preferences continue, we will never truly reside in a color/gender blind society.

The only preference that should be permitted is Veterans preference. These brave men and women CHOSE to put their life on the line and serve this country; no one chooses to be black/white have a penis/vagina. The least we can do is give our Veterans a shot at getting a job after returning home from some shithole because they EARNED it. You haven't earned anything because you have to sit to take a piss and I don't; or I because I get sunburnt and you don't.


----------



## Guest (Apr 28, 2008)

94c said:


> Only bimbos like you...
> 
> were any of them asian females?
> 
> Sorry, but I don't agree in a world where everyone wants to be treated equally and then feel they should get certain preferences.


Sorry everyone this reply took so long but I fell asleep early after Mass. Kwflabed, you were never a police officer but yet you moderate a masscops board? Do you mind if I ask why? As for minding my Ps and Qs and listen to experience I had answered a question in regards to whether or not anyone has ever been hired without residency or veterans preference. I knew the answer had been yes therefore I answered it. When my answer is met with a racist and sexist comment then inching more specifically toward my hire in that way then of course I am going to answer it.

94c, ONCE AGAIN (unless there is new president that I have not been privy to), BOSTON HAS NOT HAD ANY MINORITY PREFERENCE SINCE 2004! (based upon U.S. district court decision) SINCE 1999 PROMOTIONS HAVE IN NO WAY BEEN BASED UPON RACE (based upon Suffolk Superior Court decision). 
SO THE ANSWER IS NO 94c! Said persons were not hired off of a minority preference list! 
YES, ONE OF THEM WAS AN ASIAN FEMALE (without minority, veterans, residency, or survivor preference)! You're point is???
By the way, Asian Americans are in almost every circumstance for hire not considered minorities. Especially, when it comes to the COLLEGE BOARDS&#8230;Asian Americans are classified in with white-Americans.



LawWoman said:


> No kwflatbead you need to watch your P & Qs, grashopper is right on and I am looking forward to his next post. As for you I have spent a few hours looking at past posts because I have not been on this thing in a while, and now I remember why, not sure if its the racist and mosogynist attitude some people on here (94c/redsox) have no problem displaying.
> 
> I was trying to get 94c to just admit it, but obviously he does not have the courage of his convictions.
> 
> ...


Lawwoman, not "his" next post but rather her next post. I am a woman. Wow, If I'm not my husband will pass a brick when he finds out.



andy0921 said:


> Like many others and I have said time after time; AA is reverse-discrimination pure and simple.
> Here we go yet again with "you goddamn Christian white males think you're superior to everyone" BS.
> 
> The only thing us superior, godlike, superhuman white males covet is genuine EQAULITY. We believe people should be hired base solely on merit and qualifications.
> ...


Andy0921, I could not agree more with you and your peers whom you had mentioned! I am completely against any preferences of any kind (with the exception of disability and veterans in some circumstances). The veterans I had graduated with, I doubt they would have needed or wanted their preference. They were some of the most capable of the class. The best part of training with Vets is they won't go easier on you if you're a girl. There is no greater sign of disrespect then not throwing your A game upon me. As long as we have any affirmative action then those of us like my self who had gotten to where we are on our own accord will have ignorant, racist and sexist statements popping up from the peanut gallery from the likes of those such as 94c and redsox03 and others. Any labeling of minorities or preferences (of any kind) will perpetuate ignorant statements and lies such as ones made here and elsewhere.


----------



## redsox03 (Jan 6, 2007)

94c said:


> Sorry, but I don't agree in a world where everyone wants to be treated equally and then feel they should get certain preferences.


Anyone who agrees with this statement is RASIST and IGNORANT! 



LawWoman said:


> not sure if its the racist and mosogynist attitude some people on here (94c/redsox) have no problem displaying.


Because we don't believe in handouts, we are rasist?



LawWoman said:


> The larger point I am trying to make is that there is a double standard, if a minority get the job despite weather they got preference or not, it seems you and others here will mutha fuck that person based on that alone. But if someone gets on and they turn out to be fucked up on the job its ok, because they are a vet or a son/daughter, which is BS. That is what I am getting at.


The point is that Vets *EARNED *the preference they get. People should not get preference for being born a "minority" or a female, they didn't *EARN *ANYTHING. It is like 94c said, people want equal rights, but then want special preference. Would you call that a double standard?
I look foward to your answer, but if you'll excuse me, I've got a KKK meeting to get to........


----------



## kwflatbed (Dec 29, 2004)

Affirmative action and minority preference by lowering the standards of testing has increased since the first test in the 1960s that was frozen by Judge Wysynsky (sp).
It started with the excuse that minorities were not given the same education in the schools that the white boy got,so they could not pass the tests.
Results bus them to the suburbs with the metro program so they could learn.
More frozen tests because they still could not pass, lower the standards again change the format to a general knowledge instead of blue book or
red book testing and they still could not pass.
Now if this does not tell you something that most did not want to learn
there is something wrong with your mentality.
Next if you didn't have something hanging between your legs you could
not get hired, AA again, next nothing hanging and the wrong color make
more changes.
Next, ways for the chiefs to bypass the list,establish special groups like
the one LawWoman pointed out,score a 60 and get hired from the special
group.
Like I have said before and will say again and again the only absolute 
preference should be for someone who has fought for their country
be it man or woman of any color.
We have many minorities be it by color or sex on this board who have earned their job the right way not by waving the AA flag or crying to the
courts that the were treated unfairly in the CS testing,but they are far
outnumbered by the ones that try to take the shortcuts to the job through the courts and the special lists.


----------



## redsox03 (Jan 6, 2007)

kwflatbed said:


> Like I have said before and will say again and again the only absolute
> preference should be for someone who has fought for their country
> be it man or woman of any color.
> We have many minorities be it by color or sex on this board who have earned their job the right way not by waving the AA flag or crying to the
> ...


Well said.


----------



## Macop (May 2, 2002)

Wow, and I thought I was good at stirring the paint, Hey Redsox if you need some clean white bed sheets I think Macys is having a sale, if not try 94c's place he always has some.


----------



## kwflatbed (Dec 29, 2004)

Macop said:


> Wow, and I thought I was good at stirring the paint, Hey Redsox if you need some clean white bed sheets I think Macys is having a sale, if not try 94c's place he always has some.


Talk about racial comments,this one tops them.


----------



## Guest (Apr 28, 2008)

Macop said:


> Hey Redsox if you need some clean white bed sheets I think Macys is having a sale, if not try 94c's place he always has some.


Believing in a level playing field makes you a KKK member?

You're a complete moron.


----------



## redsox03 (Jan 6, 2007)

Macop said:


> Wow, and I thought I was good at stirring the paint, Hey Redsox if you need some clean white bed sheets I think Macys is having a sale, if not try 94c's place he always has some.


Thanks for the info Mallcop.


----------



## Andy0921 (Jan 12, 2006)

RACE CARDS!! RACE CARDS!! GET YOUR RACE CARDS HERE!!


----------



## Big.G (Nov 28, 2006)

Grasshopper said:


> 94c, ONCE AGAIN (unless there is new *president* that I have not been privy to), BOSTON HAS NOT HAD ANY MINORITY PREFERENCE SINCE 2004!


Nope, George W. is still our Prez. The hot shot know-it-all that that tries to show off her top-ranked college degree by throwing around fancy words can't even get the word precedent right...

We can play games all day long.


----------



## 94c (Oct 21, 2005)

Grasshopper said:


> Yes, some have been employed with neither the benefit of having been a resident of the city (or town) in which they were hired, nor having served their country during wartime. Those whom have been employed (without said preferences), were not merely hired within larger towns and cities, nor did they all attain their subsequent employment through any sort of survivor preferences appropriated them.


Let's try this one more time. The question was asked involving residency and civil service.

With all your great knowledge, you left out that certain departments have hired nonresidents through either consent decrees or special language lists.

Nothing more, nothing less.

But I immediately get labeled a racist for merely stating facts.

I must have struck a nerve somewhere, somehow, to someone.



LawWoman said:


> Bimbo, well said. So back to my original question? Is it safe to assume you agree with a world where the white man only prevails, just a question, be honset and answer it.


NO



LawWoman said:


> hmmm sounds like someone does not like minorities, does that go for women to?


I made a simple statement regarding the hiring of nonresidents through civil service. Which is a fact.

You equate that with hating minorities.

That makes you a race baiter.

God forbid that in this great country of ours someone could state an obvious fact and not get crucified for it, because people like you are always quick with the race card.

One more thing, I happen to know many minority police officers. They do the same job as the rest of us.

But heaven forbid, I call just one of them completely useless, and he is, without being called a racist.

Get a life.

And by the way, before you come out with the "some of by best friends are minorities" bullshit, I went one better.

I actually got one to be the godfather of my child.


----------



## 94c (Oct 21, 2005)

Grasshopper said:


> Mr. 94c, I have to get to Mass. So, I'll make this brief. I was vacillating as to whether or not I should dignify your not so subtly veiled racially (as well as gender) disparaging interrogative since I have respect for my elders and I didn't want to take a chance that at your age, you might not be able to take the embarrassment that I lay upon you, however the answer to your question is resounding and definitive NO!
> 
> I'll elaborate when I return from church but if you would like a little prelude to the illuminating of your ignorance:
> 
> ...


yak, yak, yak.

The only people I know that use $10 words are those that are trying to impress on others how smart they think they are.


----------



## Guest (Apr 30, 2008)

resqjyw0 said:


> Nope, George W. is still our Prez. The hot shot know-it-all that that tries to show off her top-ranked college degree by throwing around fancy words can't even get the word precedent right...
> 
> We can play games all day long.


I'm so happy for you! You can play games all day long here? Unfortunately, I can't. I have a job and a family and other such life enjoyments and obligations. Oh, and you can point out a typo! Wow you must be so proud! Good for you! Teacher give little resqjyw0 a gold star! He can find typos on a message board. Yeah! Alright! Yippee!



94c said:


> yak, yak, yak.
> 
> The only people I know that use $10 words are those that are trying to impress on others how smart they think they are.


Yes 94c, that's right. The question posed was in regards to civil service, "Has anyone been hired by a CS town without residency and without veteran status??? or is it not likely??"

He or she didn't ask anything about minority preference? Or did I miss something?

You asked your little minority question, "were said persons hired off of any minority preference list?" and after seeing someone of your lasciviously laden posts as well as some of your other racially motivated posts, along with some where you were referred to as old, I had figured I'd take it with a grain of salt, thinking you might just be a swarthy old man with a poor sense of humor. So I figured I'd just ignore it&#8230;until your next comment (which after some of your posts in another thread toward me) " were any of them asian females?", I surmised was more than likely directed off to me as well. After that and after referencing another female officer (LawWoman) "Only bimbos like you...",a response was absolutely called for. I hope I gave you the response you desired, BUT NOWHERE DID I CALL YOU A RACIST!

Here are the 4 posts I had made. Can you tell me where I called you a racist?

1. "Mr. 94c, I have to get to Mass. So, I'll make this brief. I was vacillating as to whether or not I should dignify your not so subtly veiled racially (as well as gender) disparaging interrogative since I have respect for my elders and I didn't want to take a chance that at your age, you might not be able to take the embarrassment that I lay upon you, however the answer to your question is resounding and definitive NO!

I'll elaborate when I return from church but if you would like a little prelude to the illuminating of your ignorance:

1. Look up applicable case law.
2. Research the demographics of recent academy classes (compare ratios of minorities to non and contrast their qualifications)
3. Look up what preferences (i.e. veteran's, residency, language, etc.) may be available from Boston as well other such cities, towns or the state. Is minority preference one of such preferences?
4. See if Asians are considered minorities when it comes to affirmative action hires or under what cir***stances they might be."

2. "Sorry everyone this reply took so long but I fell asleep early after Mass. Kwflabed, you were never a police officer but yet you moderate a masscops board? Do you mind if I ask why? As for minding my Ps and Qs and listen to experience I had answered a question in regards to whether or not anyone has ever been hired without residency or veterans preference. I knew the answer had been yes therefore I answered it. When my answer is met with a racist and sexist comment then inching more specifically toward my hire in that way then of course I am going to answer it.

94c, ONCE AGAIN (unless there is new president that I have not been privy to), BOSTON HAS NOT HAD ANY MINORITY PREFERENCE SINCE 2004! (based upon U.S. district court decision) SINCE 1999 PROMOTIONS HAVE IN NO WAY BEEN BASED UPON RACE (based upon Suffolk Superior Court decision). 
SO THE ANSWER IS NO 94c! Said persons were not hired off of a minority preference list! 
YES, ONE OF THEM WAS AN ASIAN FEMALE (without minority, veterans, residency, or survivor preference)! You're point is???
By the way, Asian Americans are in almost every cir***stance for hire not considered minorities. Especially, when it comes to the COLLEGE BOARDS&#8230;Asian Americans are classified in with white-Americans."

3. "Lawwoman, not "his" next post but rather her next post. I am a woman. Wow, If I'm not my husband will pass a brick when he finds out."

4. "Andy0921, I could not agree more with you and your peers whom you had mentioned! I am completely against any preferences of any kind (with the exception of disability and veterans in some cir***stances). The veterans I had graduated with, I doubt they would have needed or wanted their preference. They were some of the most capable of the class. The best part of training with Vets is they won't go easier on you if you're a girl. There is no greater sign of disrespect then not throwing your A game upon me. As long as we have any affirmative action then those of us like my self who had gotten to where we are on our own accord will have ignorant, racist and sexist statements popping up from the peanut gallery from the likes of those such as 94c and redsox03 and others. Any labeling of minorities or preferences (of any kind) will perpetuate ignorant statements and lies such as ones made here and elsewhere."


----------



## Big.G (Nov 28, 2006)

Grasshopper said:


> I'm so happy for you! You can play games all day long here? Unfortunately, I can't. I have a job and a family and other such life enjoyments and obligations. Oh, and you can point out a typo! Wow you must be so proud! Good for you! Teacher give little resqjyw0 a gold star! He can find typos on a message board. Yeah! Alright! Yippee!


That's right. I can point out a typo just like anyone else. Get the point? Nobody is perfect. That includes you. Stop acting like you are.

Here's a piece of advice. Before you start typing away here, make damn sure you know what you're talking about and be open to criticism. You haven't been here long enough to realize the sarcasm that is so prevalent on this board. Learn to sift through it before getting your panties in a bunch. Hint hint. STFU!

BTW, I feel bad for your husband.


----------



## emerlad (Nov 15, 2007)

Why do you have a picture of a girl holding two guns?
Is that your daughter?
This field attracts some strange birds


----------



## Guest (May 2, 2008)

emerlad said:


> Why do you have a picture of a girl holding two guns?
> Is that your daughter?
> This field attracts some strange birds


It's not just a picture. It's a poster postulating an argument AGAINST child abuse.

It's a cautionary tale emitting a warning that the same child whom one may abuse (or one similar to him or her), just might grow up and come back to be the one to incarcerate such an abuser (or one comparable). Hence the caption, "Little Asian Girl She'll Fuck Your Shit Up" was applicable since Asian women have a stereotype of being uber-subservient while having a hyper-sexualized image in popular culture, making them easy targets (or so I was told by someone who owned the poster in college).

The "picture" of which you are referencing, it's one of many commercially successful motivational posters. That is if i assume correctly that you are not referring to the signature rather than the my avatar of a "mexican standoff" from an international film (if that were the case she would be far too old to be my daughter, doesn't have 2 guns but one while she is in a theatrical device made so popular by Quentin Tarrentino and other directors).

It's a motivational poster similar to the ones you'd find at a store in the Prudential Center, facing Legal Seafood and adjacent to the escalator, on the second floor (if it's still in business, I haven't been to the Pru in quite a while). 
A friend who had the poster in college also told me all of the proceeds benefited the national Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Where the profits supposedly land is a sweet notion but after having some foresight into corporate, I'm a bit cynical during instances when others inform me charitable donations are headed anywhere. I was additionally told that the poster was reinterpreted as a pro-feminism poster and a battle cry for lesbians against abuse in the LGBT community. People are free to make reinterpretations as they see fit. I have a Celtic cross hung in my house yet I don't ascribe to any Celtic religion. To me, it's Catholic and represents my faith.

Those "two guns" that you refer to, are not authentic firearms. If one were to look at the poster the there would be noticeable differences. Those are water toys or something of that nature. If someone were to believe that a young Asian girl of that age could lift and hold aloft a real firearm (especially two of them) in the dimensions in which are depicted in the poster, then someone has been watching far too many kung-fu movies.

No, she is not my child. I would not place my child upon a poster. The appeals of having one's child partake in modeling or acting eludes me. It just seems not the healthiest of choices for a child yet, who am I to impede upon parents right to raise their child as they see fit (as long as any laws are not being broken). I have not yet been blessed to have a child (since at this point in my career and family life it would be an ill-conceived venture). When or if I have the blessing of a child, no such child of mine would be allowed to touch a firearm unless he or she is an adult within a career or considering a career in law enforcement or the military. I suppose some exceptions I MIGHT consider if presented were if it were if my child wanted membership in the Boy-Scouts or if he or she had a desire to hunt. I don't even feel too comfortable with the use of toy guns in some instances (with the possible exceptions of water-guns and for the sake of playing out assumable healthy morality narratives such as "cops and robbers"). I wouldn't even allow the use of some first person shooter video-games. Some of them are just so blatantly sadist, I don't think I would be able to handle it if I were to bare my child watching them. I'm not a mother as yet so I can only speculate.

Thank you for your question.

Although, (especially if you have not yet made yourself privy to factual basis of such remarks), please refrain from making any unnecessary comments or insults.



resqjyw0 said:


> That's right. I can point out a typo just like anyone else. Get the point? Nobody is perfect. That includes you. Stop acting like you are.
> 
> Here's a piece of advice. Before you start typing away here, make damn sure you know what you're talking about and be open to criticism. You haven't been here long enough to realize the sarcasm that is so prevalent on this board. Learn to sift through it before getting your panties in a bunch. Hint hint. STFU!
> 
> BTW, I feel bad for your husband.


Mr. resqjyw0, you had sent me a reputation comment of, 
"Shut the fuck up you pompous cunt!" C - -T??? The C Word???

Do you have any idea how disgusting, offensive and that term is to women? Do you know how degrading it is to women such as your mother, your sister(s) if you have any, any female command staff you might have or even those females you may or may not have working beside or under you. I hope your girlfriend or wife (or even boyfriend or life-partner) don't hear you speak in that manner. It might prove heart-breaking. It really saddening when we have to hear some civilians whom we serve calling us pigs etc. Must you proliferate that with such terminology?

Wow, two days since I had been here and after observing "Next Boston Academy (Merged Threads)" as well as laying my eye upon this "Change Residency" thread&#8230;well, I'm astonished&#8230;absolutely aphonic!

One hadn't been home often enough, albeit for a bit of sleep. I had thought that I would relax for a stint of time off today, when soon after I enter my desk chair, I see this carnage. I sit to my computer and these are the discussions of which I miss? Well, Well, Well. I was unable to successfully and adequately log on to my desktop for a bit yet, after being subsequently apprised by Civilian Ness (as he or um she perhaps had told me I know why). After that, as well as catching up in my reading of these posts, It would seem I'm up to speed&#8230;but I digress.

It would seem that the more scathing of remarks happen when I haven't been on&#8230;and now threats as well? Wow it looks like the nadir of civility had been breached now hadn't it? I hadn't been off this thread for not 2 days, during which not only are my academy instructors, command staff and field training officers insulted (all of which are some of the most adept and capable professionals in and outside of law enforcement), but now insults based upon race, ethnicity, gender as well as gender-identification (not just mine but of another classmate who as far as my knowledge extends had never been on here) and even my sexual-orientation have been fashioned! Does it stop there? Religion next?

I'm an avid supporter of first amendment rights (or any other rights within the constitution we have sworn to uphold) but some of the things said by some here have been just sad!


----------

