Comments by ChuckD
Posted on May 28 at 10:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Separate yourselves from 'the sinners' and the Left, eh?
I'm not sure you know anything about your Jesus Christ and the life he lived.
Some writing advice: keep your thoughts to a few sentences, otherwise you just look like you enjoy the sound of your voice too much.
Posted on May 24 at 12:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think CH4 would be a better guess. But either way, how foul.
Posted on May 19 at 11:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Right. Theft. See how far that goes in court. I don't think you understand the definition of the word.
SUNY could give them a prorated refund, but I assume they signed a code of conduct, they screwed up and broke the code as members of the SUNY community. So who cares.
Posted on May 18 at 6:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
.."a run-of-the-mill party on a run-of-the-mill night.”
Maybe that perception is the problem SUNY is trying to fix. I'm betting there's more than a handful of families in those neighborhoods who've been there a lot longer then the college kids, and will be there long after they're gone. I don't think you'd get many of them to accept late-night drinking parties with loud music is ever run-of-the-mill.
So, well done SUNY for drawing the line and siding with the community. Keep it coming.
Posted on May 16 at 12:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Phils2008, it appears you didn't get the help for your ADHD that the public system should have provided. Otherwise you might have made it through Mr. Buyck's letter and seen he's not a teacher but a student. Or, a "dope", as you put it.
Mr. Buyck, thanks very much for your well-thought out and constructed argument. Sometimes you need not go much further than here in the comments section to find the muttering masses that otherwise aimlessly wander downtown Schenectady or Albany.
Posted on May 15 at 10:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So it's legal for a uniformed law enforcement officer to publicly scoff the laws he's sworn to uphold? It's ok for them to pick and choose the laws they feel like enforcing? How comforting. How about when they feel they don't want to protect a particular class of people because maybe they have different political or social sentiments than them. I guess they can do that too?
How about some local newsfolk dig into this some more and see if what he did was not in violation of his oath.
Good or bad, the SAFE act is law (and constitutional, as eloquently stated by one Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia). That means law enforcement personnel are required to enforce it.
Posted on May 9 at 10:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ice cream trucks? Seriously?
There needs to be some investigative journalism exercised on this business. It seems any place I've lived there have been stories of bad actors working as ice cream truck drivers. Is there any oversight? Aside from the ice cream being typically garbage, I don't let my kids near these people.
Posted on May 7 at 7:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sorry robertodt, I just don't feel like I'm being "punished" for helping keep drunk drivers off that road. That smacks of beligerence.
Posted on May 5 at 12:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And if you're against further regulation of guns, having to register and insure your car must give you absolute fits. And DWI checkpoints must be like a totalitarian state for you.
If you're consistent in your thinking anyway...
Too bad you don't have any interest in addressing and working with the majority of the country's concerns (forget the politicians). We could use gun owners' constructive input.
Posted on April 27 at 9:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Uhm, it's "Kottke" please.