CCW renewal class

[rycerz]

OK, the original poster of this thread has relayed HER observations and spoken about her experience during the class. Does that mean that the instructor is bad? No. Do the posts talking about how folks had a great experience in his class mean he's a great instructor? No.

Something that is not mentioned is that an instructor must learn to adjust and adapt to the audience. What works for some, does not work for others. Fact that someone felt belittled proves that. The legal folks should be the first ones to know that it's not what is said that often causes the trouble but rather how it's perceived based on delivery and circumstances.

I have no problem with the OP making her post, but I do have a problem with folks coming out of the woodwork and making a single post about how great the instructor is and then slamming the OP and or the site. I think that borderlines trolling....

[rycerz]

Originally Posted by usmc_jagGIRL

All of those who have slandered Ken Greenwood please advise to this site.

Defamation, Libel and Slander Law

Since we're talking about the defamation (which from the looks of it includes both libel and slander) lets not forget that all "elements" have to be met. Defamation consists of the following:

(1) a defamatory statement;
(2) published to third parties; and
(3) which the speaker or publisher knew or should have known was false.

Without knowing the facts I could go as far as agree with you that it is possible 1 and 2 could potentially be met but you're also implying that the poster KNOWINGLY presented false information which IMHO is defamation by itself because you have no proof that the poster did that........

[CalCCW03]

First of all, the original poster was only giving her personal opinion on the course she took. I don't see how that is slanderous at all.

Secondly, it is against site policy for members to have more than one user ID. As stated in the Site Rules in the General FAQ Forum:

Each member is allowed one account. Registering multiple accounts is not allowed. Multiple user registrations for one individual are not permitted. If it is discovered that an individual has multiple accounts, we may delete or suspend one or all of these accounts without notice.

I couldn't help but notice that horses4terri and usmc_jagGIRL share the same IP address:

It could be that you are the daughter that horses4terri mentioned in her post but it is my opinion that it is misleading for you not to say so. Now, if it is indeed a case of the same person having 2 accounts please PM me which one you would like removed. Thanks

[BonoVox]

Originally Posted by rycerz

Since we're talking about the defamation (which from the looks of it includes both libel and slander) lets not forget that all "elements" have to be met. Defamation consists of the following:

(1) a defamatory statement;
(2) published to third parties; and
(3) which the speaker or publisher knew or should have known was false.

Without knowing the facts I could go as far as agree with you that it is possible 1 and 2 could potentially be met but you're also implying that the poster KNOWINGLY presented false information which IMHO is defamation by itself because you have no proof that the poster did that........

and.......

What Defenses Are Available To People Accused of Defamation?
The most important defense to an action for defamation is "truth", which is an absolute defense to an action for defamation.

[Keith92555]

Originally Posted by CalCCW03

First of all, the original poster was only giving her personal opinion on the course she took. I don't see how that is slanderous at all.

Secondly, it is against site policy for members to have more than one user ID. As stated in the Site Rules in the General FAQ Forum:



I couldn't help but notice that horses4terri and usmc_jagGIRL share the same IP address:

It could be that you are the daughter that horses4terri mentioned in her post but it is my opinion that it is misleading for you not to say so. Now, if it is indeed a case of the same person having 2 accounts please PM me which one you would like removed. Thanks

First of all...
Nice catch. I saw that, too, with both posters being from Shingle Springs. How many people are from Shingle Springs, anyway?

Secondly...
The OP expressed her opinion of HOW SHE FELT during the class. Good luck proving that she was knowingly making false statements. Those kind of statements from jagGIRL make you wonder how much of HER STATEMENT is true. Is she REALLY working JAG for USMC? HMMMMMM...I wonder... I would find it difficult to believe that someone who writes like that could have enough G2 to work for JAG. Just my opinion....don't go suing me for slander.

[mark]

I agree, anyone can come into a forum and say whoever they want to be or thread about their exploits,

If she is not a Marine, and not working for the Judge Advocate General, then that is............well wrong for so many reasons,

was the ip address "pinged"? just wondering

[usmc_jagGIRL]

Ouch not enough G2 haha, well it's a good thing those decisions aren't up to you Keith. My MOS is not to your concern, thank goodness.

My activity was in a public place, you're so smart haha

Also, it's not all of the three you listed it is AT LEAST ONE from FOUR (or more depending on relation) i.g.
1. A false and defamatory statement concerning another;
2. The unprivileged publication of the statement to a third party (that is, somebody other than the person defamed by the statement);
3. If the defamatory matter is of public concern, fault amounting at least to negligence on the part of the publisher; and
4. Damage to the plaintiff.

You can slander my user name all you want Keith haha, at least it's not my legal name...

[heypal]

questionable (at best) jag association, questionable ip shenanigans, questionable criminal accusations...

my first thought was that moderators should tread lightly before locking this thread to make sure not to step on a legitimate conversation, but this has degraded to the point of being ridiculous.

I propose the mods give jag girl an opportunity to prove her jag association (and perhaps to explain her loose understanding of the law) then give her an opportunity to open a thread of her own, maybe praising the instructor - or they may take appropriate action in dealing with fraudulent claims. In the meantime, the real question at hand should be the OP's thread. I suggest the comment has been addressed and discussed in an appropriate manner and that the thread has been hijacked. Is there a protocol in this situation?

[mark]

the popcorn is in the bag

[usmc_jagGIRL]

Well as for proving I am in the Corps, I won't. I have no need to prove to any of you that I am. Also, as for understanding the law, I have stated in a loose and non-specific manner a brief understanding of how ridiculous some of the mob of users has taken the matter. I am done conversing on this thread. I did not join to be disrespected in such a manner, I joined this site so that I may converse with people of like minded opinions (so much for that). I stood up for someone I actually know and met at the range because, I will stand up for what is true. Hurting someones business in a wrongful manner is not only distasteful, it is wrong on many levels.

[heypal]

I agree that making statements intended solely to harm someone's business is not a good thing to do. I don't know what the disconnect is here. The OP was relating her experience. In a forum filled with people who enjoy exercising their 2A rights. If you are someone who celebrates the constitution in a similar manner, and is interested in CCW, this is the place for you and you are welcome. Within limits.

I have never seen this site ask members not to air their thoughts, grievances, or to withhold praise. You are welcome to post a conflicting opinion. Where you seem to have crossed the line is the moment you accused the OP of a criminal act. Luckily, we live in America, and opinions, and the right to express them, are ours to have hold and cherish. Insinuating that you are affiliated with JAG is making a claim to credentials which give you a higher authority here than the average joe. Such claims should be substantiated.

I, too, am done with this topic. Good luck. You're going to need it.

[mjones]

I have my doubts that all three assertions in this trolls name are real.

[swdr]

Very disappointing.

Firstly we have a new forum member, Horses4terri, whose first post claims that the OP is using "hatred" to "smear" an instructor she knows and likes. The OP clearly did nothing of the sort.

Now, we have yet another new forum member, Usmc_jagGIRL, whose first post claims that the OP's (and apparently other's) opinions are "slander" and "unjust". Again, clearly nothing of the sort. (And, yes, I have no trouble believing that she actually is in a JAG office; that just adds to the disappointment.)

As they both seemed to be upset on their initial post, I can understand why neither new member could bring herself to read the details of either the OP's post or of the follow-on posts. Hopefully, they will each take the time to do so soon.

In the meantime, I hope that Usmc_jagGIRL can find a way to stop behaving like a young troll.

[Keith92555]

Originally Posted by heypal

questionable (at best) jag association, questionable ip shenanigans, questionable criminal accusations...

my first thought was that moderators should tread lightly before locking this thread to make sure not to step on a legitimate conversation, but this has degraded to the point of being ridiculous.

I propose the mods give jag girl an opportunity to prove her jag association (and perhaps to explain her loose understanding of the law) then give her an opportunity to open a thread of her own, maybe praising the instructor - or they may take appropriate action in dealing with fraudulent claims. In the meantime, the real question at hand should be the OP's thread. I suggest the comment has been addressed and discussed in an appropriate manner and that the thread has been hijacked. Is there a protocol in this situation?

Gotta agree. This thread is degrading quickly (sorry if I had a hand in that ). We digress from the OP. She is decidedly entitled to her opinion. Whether you agree with it or not is up for you to decide based on personal experience, OPs reputation, reasonableness of her statement, etc... If you disagree you are free to post it here. If you have some kind words about Mr. Greenwood, you can also post them here or start a thread of your own describing your good encounter with him.

Neither the OP nor her antagonist had a long history on the forum as of the time of their respective posts (nor do I for that matter). So everyone who reads this forum must take all things into consideration before making their own judgement. The OP may not have enjoyed Mr. Greenwoods class, but I am sure even SHE would tell you she learned something new during the class.

I did learn something from the OP though. There are some people who teach (whether it be firearms, golf, baseball...) who believe that their way is the only way to do things. It is my belief that there is more than one way to make an omelette. If you don't like the way I break the eggs, you should withhold judgement until you taste the omelette. If the OP was doing something that was patently unsafe with the firearm, she should be corrected without being belittled. I didn't gleen that from her post. It sounded like she was unable to perform a task the way Mr. Grenwood wanted it done. If she had a different method that was safe, why not let her do it her way?

If horses4terri has a difference of opinion with respect to Mr. Greenwood, she has the right to her opinion, also. But you can't argue with GlockGirl's perception of how she was treated. I have been in customer service for over 20 years and one thing we are taught in that respect is that the customer's perception is their reality. If she thought she was disrespected, you can't argue with that. You can't call her a liar or accuse her of defamation because it is her perception she is describing, not an objective fact.

Mr. Greenwood, from horses4terri's description, seems like a great person. Volunteers his time for his community, teaches to a high standard, makes safety paramount in his classes... But just because someone is a great guy, it doesn't make him a good teacher, boss, LEO... I had a SSgt in the Marines who was the biggest tool you could imagine to work for. We all despised him and would avoid him at all cost while at the shop. But off duty he would always show up at the bar we frequented and buy a round for everyone in the platoon. He also volunteered 1 night a week at the servicemen's center in town. It is what it is and you can't argue with someone's perception.

I, for one, would like to hear Mr. Greenwood's description of the events. Unfortunately, after all this time he might not even remember GlockGirl being in one of his classes. So, we are stuck trying to decypher this man from a couple of posts on a public forum. Good luck with that...

[CalCCW03]

OK. The OP related her personal experience with the instructor in question, which was not a positive one. IMHO, they were neither slanderous or libelous (is that a word?).

The OP, as well as everyone else who has posted in this thread has every right to express their opinion as long as it does not turn into a personal attack. Accusing someone of slander in my opinion, is a personal attack.

I have read a couple other posts USMC_JagGirl has made and they did contribute to the site. While she may if she wishes to, she does not have to prove that she is indeed associated with JAG. I could care less either way. However, I would like an answer to the question I posed earlier: Is horses4terri and USMC_JagGirl the same person? If so, please PM me which ID you would like deleted.

I hate locking threads but this one has run its course.