Sometimes people fail to act based on bylaws requirements, for example they don’t maintain an eligibility requirement. The officer charged with keeping such records makes note and informs the appropriate officer on the committee of such failure and that there is a vacancy on the committee that needs to be filled.
Of course the bylaws don’t act by themselves, that would be silly.

It occurs to me to note as well that all the instances of dead police mentioned above are featured in films like “Demolition Man” and television shows and such. I don’t have to conceive of, design, or commit any of these acts to enjoy their depiction. I cheer for the individuals who oppose the pigs.

Unless you are the police, Robert, you don’t need to apologise for them.

I appreciate your candor and your efforts to apologise. Perhaps we should leave it there. Thank you for having some consideration.

All cops are deliberately evil. There are only two kinds of good cops. Those who are dead (preferable) and those who have quit being cops (less preferable, as potentially temporary).

“I’ve seen both, and had both in the family.”

You should be ashamed of them.

“To paint everyone of a profession with the same brush is infantile and evidence of a poor an uninformed mind clouded by bad attitude.”

Well, have some of your pig friends beat me up for my bad attitude, then, jock pig-lover scum. What should inform my attitude about pigs? The way they beat up non-violent people? The way they kick in doors without warrants? Or the way they eat donuts?

The world would be a better place if police as a profession had not been invented. Given that pigs exist, it would be better if they were all slaughtered.

“I’m sorry you’ve been beaten by cops before,”

No, you aren’t. You are a bully, and a jock. You like the idea of beating people up. It thrills you. You want more people beaten up which is why you love pigs.

“I’m sorry you seem to hate the universe.”

On the contrary, only you and your family of pigs. I enjoy God’s creation, especially His cornucopia.

“how about working on yours?”

I like my attitude. I find it very invigorating. I sit in my office every day, look outside at the flowers blooming and the vegetables growing, and enjoy my attitude about dead cops. Millions of Dead Cops, before they changed their name, was my favorite band.

Imagine it Michael. Everyone in your family who was ever a cop, dead. Preferably beaten to death by a crowd. Burned to death in their patrol cars. Blown up in their pig stations. Gunned down in donut shops. It would be fun, it would make the world a better place, it would be educational, and it would be pigless. Piglessness is a blessing. Every place where there are no pigs is better.

The same exact thing is my attitude toward death camp guards. The same exact attitude functions perfectly for CIA torturers. For those who detain prisoners indefinitely, who torture men, women, and children to death, for those who sodomise children as your military has filmed Iraqi prison guards doing, in front of their mothers.

Why are the pigs the problem? They enforce mala prohibitum laws. They do so deliberately and maliciously because they want to enforce those laws.

And, of course, you aren’t a libertarian because you want them to enforce those laws, you like them to enforce unjust laws, you like the idea of people being beaten up, killed, tasered, tortured, robbed, and looted by police. The police are your team.

My attitude is that your team is the Nazi death camp guards, the Gulag archipelago guards, the NKVD, the KGB, the Gestapo. They aren’t my neighbors. May history never record they were my countrymen.

It isn’t just an attitude, it is a fact. It is a fact that the police are evil and should be disbanded. It is a fact that the police take stolen money in every paycheck. It is a fact that the unjust laws could not be enforced without the police. It is a fact that the police are those who kick in doors, drag away dissidents, taser those who ask questions at political rallies, appear on the streets in their pig armor to stomp the faces of protestors. It is a fact that all pigs everywhere like being the boot smashing a human face, forever.

So, turn me in, pig-lover. You know you want to.

It is the profession. It is the job of pigs to enforce unjust laws, to harass non-violent non-criminals, to beat up ambulance drivers in Oklahoma, to kick in doors, to murder old women for allegedly being drug dealers, to empty their clips into unarmed men, women, and children.

There is only one thing a cop should do. Quit.

me: “even”? I can research a frame-by-frame analysis of a dog chasing its tail, but — big picture — it’s a dog chasing its tail. Seems woefully counterproductive.

I’m amused that you refer to me as an “apologist,” as my opinion was this was an overreaction, poor judgment, and hyper-technical, and a waste of time. Yet, it IS a “teachable moment” as you left coasters are wont to say…

Or maybe you’ve different take on the word “apologist,” as I’ve suggested Wrights is probably due an apology?…

It’s not the profession, it’s what people do in it.

For every five quiet Mother Theresas there’s a loud Roger Mahoney making the other five look bad.

In the case of Lee Wrights, the actions of the Gang of Eigfht are generally viewed as bad by people with common sense and decency, all apologists aside.

Do your own research, Robert. I did it, and even you can too!

so , having cops in the family does have its benefits:)

Oddly enough, this seems to be the root of the problem. If there isn’t agreement on the difference between facts and opinions, it’s rather difficult to have a meaningful conversation…I’d hope you agree with at least THAT.

Perhaps you can share how you construe your opinions as facts. Let’s, IOW, get radical…

The cops who beat Rodney King did, in my eyes, something very bad. I guarantee you we could probably find some racists or people who hate drug users or some such, who would claim that what they did was good. It’s all subjective.

Are the cops who I get along with “good”? No more so than you, or me, or anyone else. I know a lot of people and get along with most of them despite what faults they may have, so long as they are not faults which personally affect me, such as someone who steals from their friends.

To paint everyone of a profession with the same brush is infantile and evidence of a poor an uninformed mind clouded by bad attitude.

I’m sorry you’ve been beaten by cops before, and I’m sorry you seem to hate the universe. But your attitude is your choice, your responsibility, and your problem–just as how cops conduct themselves on duty is theirs. Rather than bitch and moan about theirs, how about working on yours? How’s that Facebook thing going, BTW?

The facts you refuse to see, Robert, have been laid out here for all to see. If you have the inability to read or process them, then that’s your problem.

But I’ll restate them, so perhaps just maybe you’ll have a ghost of a chance that you’ll understand:

1) Bylaws are not self-executing. People do actions based on Bylaws, and they Bylaws do not do them themselves.
2) There is a difference between status and process based on status.
3) Words in legalistic documents, even purported words of art, have significant and specific explicit meanings.
4) When dealing with the relationship between Bylaws and RONR, RONR is secondary the Bylaws because the Bylaws supersede them.
5) The Gang of Eight doesn’t understand these first 4, nor basic leadership.

me: I find it interesting that you have repeatedly made this claim, you never specify which “facts” I don’t see.

This strikes me as an epistemological question. At any given moment, we have millions of stimuli, facts if you prefer, that we choose to focus on. We each choose to filter those facts, assess them, and then form opinions or make decisions based on them. With me?

I get the sense that you believe that anyone who doesn’t agree (perhaps in total) with how you’ve filtered and assessed the fact set surrounding the current LNC is somehow “stupid.” Is that a fair characterization of your view?

If so, that goes to some pretty narrow-minded, dualistic places, I’d suggest–a plumb line on steroids!

If I misunderstand, please have the courtesy to restate your position. Can we or can we not sometimes — even always — disagree with you and NOT be “stupid”? For ex., I seem to recall that Einstein was a socialist. Was he stupid, too?